CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 211Schizophrenia research and treatmentPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingMental Health and Psychiatry

Single Indicator of Risk for Schizophrenia: Probable Fact or Likely Myth?

Claridge, G.·1994·Schizophrenia Bulletin
DOI 10.1093/schbul/20.1.151
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The longitudinal followup strategy in high-risk research is being increasingly complemented by the use of psychosis-proneness scales to select subjects for study who might be vulnerable to schizophrenia and who show differences on laboratory measures that could act as endophenotypic markers for use in genetic investigations. Three types of experimental paradigm have been adopted, drawn from cognitive psychology, psychophysiology, and the neuropsychology of hemisphere function. Results adopting each of these approaches are examined, alongside recent factor-analytic evidence that psychosis-proneness scales currently in use tap up to four different components that map onto the clinical heterogeneity of schizophrenia (and possibly other forms of psychosis). No one of these components clearly emerges as, or points to, a single indicator of risk, though some aspect of neurocognitive functioning seems a likely candidate. Even so, it is argued, the clinical expression of vulnerability must be due to a convergence in an individual of several components of risk since individually (and notably so for "susceptibility to positive symptoms") they are very common in the healthy population. In evaluating the evidence, attention is drawn to two crucially different ways that investigators in schizophrenia research have construed the notion of continuity (1) as subclinical defect (or forme fruste of disease) having varying expression or (2) as biologically based personality dimensions that simultaneously describe the dispositions to aberrations of function leading to degree of illness. It is noted that the model of continuity chosen can significantly shape the way the results of risk research are interpreted and the theories of psychosis to which they give rise.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/schbul/20.1.151

Cites

131 of 131 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Claridge, G.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Claridge, G.
Venue
Schizophrenia Bulletin
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
1994-01-01
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
151-168
ISSN
  • 0586-7614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-1701
DOI
10.1093/schbul/20.1.151
OpenAlex
W1993109043
Cited by
211
References
131
Citations by year
2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 5
FWCI
6.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Schizophrenia Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
schizophrenia risk
MeSH terms
Genetic Markers, Humans, Phenotype, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Risk Factors, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Schizotypal Personality Disorder

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review