Positive and meaningful lives: Systematic review and meta‐analysis of eudaimonic well‐being in first‐episode psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: First-episode psychosis typically has its onset during adolescence. Prolonged deficits in social functioning are common in FEP and yet often variance in functioning remains unexplained. Developmental psychology frameworks may be useful for understanding these deficits. Eudaimonic well-being (EWB), or positive self-development, is a developmental psychology construct that has been shown to predict mental health outcomes across multiple populations but has not been systematically reviewed in FEP. AIM: Our aim was to systematically review the evidence for: the predictors of EWB, the effectiveness of EWB interventions and to examine the quality of this research in FEP. METHODS: Selected studies measured either composite or components of EWB. A systematic search produced 2876 abstracts and 122 articles were identified for full screening which produced 17 final papers with 2459 participants. RESULTS: Studies comprised six RCTs, eight prospective follow-up studies and three case-controlled studies. Self-esteem and self-efficacy were the most commonly measured components. A meta-analysis of RCTs revealed no statistically significant effect of interventions on self-esteem. The extant research indicates that character strengths may be associated with higher EWB. Self-esteem may be lower in FEP compared with age matched controls but not different from ultra-high risk patients. Self-esteem appears to be associated with poorer insight and improved therapeutic alliance. Significant problems with both external and internal validity of reviewed studies were apparent. CONCLUSIONS: The hypotheses that lowered EWB is a risk factor for both onset of FEP and for poorer functional outcomes warrant further investigation. There is currently no evidence for effective interventions for EWB in FEP.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".