No abstract

Aim Several lines of evidence suggest a possible association between a history of trauma in childhood and later psychosis or psychotic-like-experiences. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent of childhood trauma and bullying in young people at clinical high risk (CHR) of developing psychosis. Methods The sample consisted of 360 individuals who were at CHR of developing psychosis and 180 age and gender matched healthy controls. All participants were assessed on past trauma and bullying. The CHR participants were also assessed on a range of psychopathology and functioning. Results Individuals at CHR reported significantly more trauma and bullying than healthy controls. Those who had experienced past trauma and bullying were more likely to have increased levels of depression and anxiety and a poorer sense of self. Conclusions These results offer preliminary support for an association between a history of trauma and later subthreshold symptoms.

Given that CHR individuals are reporting increased rates of trauma and perceived discrimination, these should be routinely assessed, with the possibility of offering interventions aimed at ameliorating the impact of past traumas as well as improving self-esteem and coping strategies in an attempt to reduce perceived discrimination.

We examined processing of verbal irony in three groups of children: (1) 18 children with high-functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder (HFASD), (2) 18 typically- developing children, matched to the first group for verbal ability, and (3) 18 typically-developing children matched to the first group for chronological age. We utilized an irony comprehension task that minimized verbal and pragmatic demands for participants. Results showed that children with HFASD were as accurate as typicallydeveloping children in judging speaker intent for ironic criticisms, but group differences in judgment latencies, eye gaze, and humor evaluations suggested that children with HFASD applied a different processing strategy for irony comprehension; one that resulted in less accurate appreciation of the social functions of irony.

Aim The first aim of this project was to identify a sample of youth who met different stages of risk for the development of a serious mental illness (SMI) based on a published clinical staging model. The second aim was to determine whether participants allocated to the different stages were a good fit to the model by comparing these groups on a range of clinical measures. Methods This two‐site longitudinal study recruited 243 youth, ages 12 to 25. The sample included (a) 42 healthy controls, (b) 43 non‐help seeking individuals with no mental illness but with some risk of SMI, such as having a first‐degree relative with a SMI (stage 0), (c) 52 help‐seeking youth experiencing distress and possibly mild symptoms of anxiety or depression (stage 1a) and (d) 108 youth with attenuated symptoms of SMI, such as bipolar disorder or psychosis (stage 1b). Participants completed a range of measures assessing depression, anxiety, mania, suicide ideation, attenuated psychotic symptoms, negative symptoms, anhedonia and beliefs about oneself. Results There were no clinical differences between HCs and participants in stage 0. For most of the clinical measures, participants in stage 1b had more severe ratings than participants in stages 1a and 0 and HCs; those in stage 1a had more severe ratings than HCs and stage 0 participants. Conclusions These results suggest that the staging process used to allocate participants to various stages is a good fit. That is, the clinical ratings followed an ordering effect consistent with that hypothesized in the staging model.

A detailed examination of the clinical and functional outcomes of those who did not make the transition to psychosis did not contribute to predicting who may make the transition or who may have an earlier remission of attenuated psychotic symptoms.

The sensitivity of these scales ranged from 67% to 100% and the specificity ranged from 39% to 100%. The positive predictive value was less precise with scores ranging from 24% to 100%, and the negative predictive value ranging from 58% to 100%. There were several scales that might be useful for screening for individuals who are at increased risk for developing psychosis; however, the majority of measures are underexplored with poor validation.

Aim There is evidence to suggest that perceived discrimination may be associated with psychosis. Less is known about its potential impact on those at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of perceived discrimination in a CHR sample and its possible relationship to attenuated positive symptoms and negative self-beliefs. Methods Participants were 360 CHR individuals and 180 healthy controls. Assessments included a self-report measure of perceived discrimination, the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms and the Brief Core Schema Scale. Results CHR participants reported significantly more perceived discrimination. Perceived discrimination was significantly associated with negative schemas but not with attenuated positive symptoms. Conclusions These results suggest that individuals at CHR for psychosis endorse a higher level of perceived discrimination which is associated with increased negative schemas but not attenuated positive symptoms.