Incidence, Prevalence, and Stability of Remission in Individuals With Clinical High Risk for Psychosis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: While remission from clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis is a favorable outcome, it is not well characterized over time. Objective: To examine remission incidence, prevalence, and stability, and their association with demographic, clinical, medication, and cognitive variables, comparing 2 commonly used definitions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study examined data from individuals aged 12 to 30 years at CHR in the North American Prodromal Longitudinal Study 3, collected from 9 sites across the US from February 2015 to November 2018. Statistical analyses were conducted between January 2023 and May 2025. Exposure: CHR status using 2 definitions: (1) a symptoms-only definition based on the positive symptoms from the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms and (2) a symptoms-and-function definition based on positive symptoms and the modified Global Assessment of Functioning. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were remission incidence, prevalence, and stability for 7 follow-up visits over 2 years. Associations of remission with age, sex at birth, race, antipsychotic and antidepressant medication, history of trauma, and cognitive performance were determined using mixed-effects logistic regression. Results: The sample included 692 individuals (mean [SD] age, 18.7 [4.1] years; 319 female [46%]) at baseline, with 614 completing at least 1 follow-up. For the symptoms-only definition, 7% (95% CI, 5%-10%) met remission criteria after 2 months, 34% (95% CI, 31%-38%) met remission criteria at least once during the study, and 26% (95% CI, 22%-29%) met criteria at their last visit. The symptoms-and-function definition was associated with a lower remission incidence and prevalence, with 4% (95%CI, 2%-5%) meeting remission criteria after 2 months, 21% (95% CI, 18%-24%) meeting criteria at least once, and 15% (95% CI, 13%-18%) meeting criteria at their last visit. Under the symptoms-only definition, 83 of 153 individuals at CHR with at least 1 follow-up after remission (54%; 95% CI, 46%-62%) were stable remitters. Under the symptoms-and-function definition, 43 of 91 individuals (47%; 95% CI, 37%-58%) were stable remitters. The chance of staying in remission rose drastically once a person had more than 1 previous recorded remission visit. Higher functioning was associated with higher likelihood of remission (current score for symptoms only: OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08; current score for symptoms and function: OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.02-1.14). More symptoms at baseline was associated with a lower likelihood of remission (general symptoms for symptoms only: OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.84; general symptoms for symptoms and function: OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.92). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that CHR status is a dynamic state and that vulnerability can persist even after functional remission. Hence, continued follow-up and facilitated reengagement with clinical services after remission are essential.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».