MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407947595 · doi:10.1038/s41537-025-00582-5

Clinical prediction model for transition to psychosis in individuals meeting At Risk Mental State criteria

2025· article· en· W4407947595 on OpenAlex
Laura Bonnett, Alexandra Hunt, Allan Flores, Catrin Tudur Smith, Filippo Varese, Rory Byrne, Heather Law, Rebekah Carney, Sophie Parker, Alison R. Yung, Jai Shah, Marita Pruessner, Ashok Malla, Tim Ziermans, Sarah Durston, Wing Chung Chang, Anthony P. Morrison, David Shiers, Mark van der Gaag, William R. McFarlane, Patrick Welsh, Paul A. Tiffin, Anita Riecher‐Rössler, Erich Studerus, Frauke Schultze‐Lutter, Stephan Ruhrmann, Joachim Klosterkötter, Suk Kyoon An, Inti Qurashi, Nusrat Huasain, Simon Chu, G. Paul Amminger, Magdalena Kotlicka‐Antczak, Jean Addington, Silvia Rigucci, Swapna Verma, Chun Ting Chan, Masahiro Katsura, Kazunori Matsumoto, Tsutomu Takahashi, Pablo A. Gaspar, Rolando Castillo, Sebastián Corral, Rocío Mayol-Troncoso, Alejandro Maturana, Peter J. Uhlhaas, Nicolas Rüsch

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryHotchkiss Brain InstituteMcGill University
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsPsychosisPsychologyLogistic regressionClinical psychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Global Assessment of FunctioningScale (ratio)PsychiatryComputer scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The At Risk Mental State (ARMS) (also known as the Ultra or Clinical High Risk) criteria identify individuals at high risk for psychotic disorder. However, there is a need to improve prediction as only about 18% of individuals meeting these criteria develop a psychosis with 12-months. We have developed and internally validated a prediction model using characteristics that could be used in routine practice. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, followed by focus groups with clinicians and service users to ensure that identified factors were suitable for routine practice. The model was developed using logistic regression with backwards selection and an individual participant dataset. Model performance was evaluated via discrimination and calibration. Bootstrap resampling was used for internal validation. RESULTS: We received data from 26 studies contributing 3739 individuals; 2909 from 20 of these studies, of whom 359 developed psychosis, were available for model building. Age, functioning, disorders of thought content, perceptual abnormalities, disorganised speech, antipsychotic medication, cognitive behavioural therapy, depression and negative symptoms were associated with transition to psychosis. The final prediction model included disorders of thought content, disorganised speech and functioning. Discrimination of 0.68 (0.5-1 scale; 1=perfect discrimination) and calibration of 0.91 (0-1 scale; 1=perfect calibration) showed the model had fairly good predictive ability. DISCUSSION: The statistically robust prediction model, built using the largest dataset in the field to date, could be used to guide frequency of monitoring and enable rational use of health resources following assessment of external validity and clinical utility.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.344 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it