Psychotic Risk in Pediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Correlations with Clinical Traits and Treatment Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background<br/>Children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) face a heightened risk of developing psychotic disorders, however, the characteristics of psychotic vulnerability in children and adolescents with OCD remain largely unexplored.<br/><br/>Method<br/>This study used the 15 item Thought Problems subscale from the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) to investigate the prevalence of psychotic vulnerability in children and adolescents with OCD from Scandinavia (n = 215) and the United States (n = 125). Participants with and without psychotic vulnerability were compared on various clinical characteristics, including psychosocial functioning, anxiety and depression, both before and after cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). We also explored whether psychotic vulnerability could predict CBT outcomes, measures with The Children’s Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS).<br/><br/>Results<br/>Psychotic vulnerability was observed in 41.6% of the Scandinavian sample and 34.4% of the North American sample. In both groups, children and adolescents with psychotic vulnerability exhibited more depressive symptoms and lower psychosocial functioning at baseline. Post-CBT, those with psychotic vulnerability in the Scandinavian group continued to show poorer psychosocial functioning and had more symptoms from the symmetry/hoarding dimension, whereas in the North American sample, it was associated with the contamination-cleaning dimension. Psychotic vulnerability did not influence CBT outcomes in either group.<br/><br/>Conclusions<br/>Consistent with prior research, our findings indicate that a comprehensive, second-tier evaluation of psychosis risk is warranted in numerous cases of youth with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), especially in children and adolescents exhibiting impaired global functioning. Additionally, our results suggest that immediate CBT outcome is not affected by psychotic vulnerability in pediatric OCD.<br/>
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".