Extreme negative evaluations of self and others appear to be characteristic of the appraisals of people with chronic psychosis, and are associated with symptoms of grandiosity and paranoia in the non-clinical population. The BCSS may provide a more useful measure of schemata about self and others than traditional measures of self-esteem.

The results provide support for the prediction that there may be two routes between trauma and predisposition to psychosis. Clear support was found for a link between trauma and psychosis mediated by negative beliefs about self and others. There may also be a direct association between re-experiencing symptoms and hallucinations.

BackgroundPosttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in response to psychosis and associated experiences (psychosis-related PTSD, or PR-PTSD) is the subject of a growing field of research. However, a wide range of PR-PTSD prevalence rates has been reported. This may be due to definitional and methodological inconsistencies in the assessment of PR-PTSD.ObjectiveThe focus of the review is two-fold. (1) To identify factors that enhance, or detract from, the robustness of PR-PTSD assessment and (2) to critically evaluate the evidence in relation to these identified criteria, including the impact on PR-PTSD prevalence rates.MethodFour quality criteria, whose development was informed by mainstream PTSD research, were selected to evaluate findings on PR-PTSD prevalence. Two criteria related to assessment of psychosis-related stressors (participant identification of worst moments of discrete threat events; psychometrically robust trauma measure) and two focussed on PR-PTSD symptom measurement (adequate time elapsed since trauma; use of validated PTSD interview) in the context of psychosis.ResultsTwenty-one studies of PR-PTSD, with prevalence rates ranging from 11 to 51%, were evaluated. Fourteen studies (67%) used robust PTSD measures but PR-trauma was not specifically defined or assessed with validated measures. Eleven studies (52%) assessed PTSD before sufficient time had elapsed since the trauma. Due to significant methodological limitations, it was not possible to review PR-PTSD rates and provide a revised estimate of prevalence.ConclusionsMethodological limitations are common in existing studies of PR-PTSD prevalence. Specific recommendations for improving assessment of psychosis-related trauma are made to guide the development of this new and emerging field. The review concludes with a proposed conceptualisation of PR-PTSD in the context of current diagnostic systems. The utility of the PR-PTSD term and its theoretical underpinnings are discussed.Highlights of the articleOverall, robust measures of PTSD were employed but psychosis-related trauma was not specifically defined and time since trauma was not consistently recordedGiven the above methodological limitations in the assessment of PR-PTSD, a revised prevalence rate is not providedA new conceptualisation of PR-PTSD in relation to the type of stressor is proposed in the context of current diagnostic systems

No abstract

No abstract