Background & Objectives: Theory-driven interventions targeting specific factors that contribute to delusions are receiving increased interest. The present study aimed to assess the efficacy of individualized metacognitive therapy (MCT+), a short manualized intervention that addresses delusion-associated cognitive biases.Methods: 92 patients with current or past delusions were randomized to receive 12 twiceweekly sessions of either MCT+ or a control intervention within a randomized controlled raterblind design. Psychopathology and cognitive biases were assessed at baseline, 6 weeks and 6 months. ANCOVAs adjusted for baseline scores were used to assess differences between groups regarding outcome variables. Both per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses were conducted.Results: At 6 weeks, there was a significant difference in favor of MCT+ regarding decrease in delusion severity and improvement of self-reflectiveness (medium effect size), and a trend-wise difference regarding probability threshold to decision. These effects increased, when only patients attending a minimum of 4 therapy sessions were considered. Control group patients subsequently showed further improvement while patients in the MCT+ group remained stable, such that there were no differences between groups at the 6-month follow-up.Limitations: Lower attendance rates in the control group possibly leading to unequal therapeutic effort; lower baseline delusion severity in the MCT+ group.
Conclusions:The result pattern suggests that MCT+ led to an earlier improvement in delusions and cognitive biases compared to the control intervention. The absence of a long-term effect might reflect floor effects in the MCT+ group, but may also indicate the need for further measures to promote sustainability of MCT+ effects.
The lower peripheral BDNF levels in ARMS compared to FEP and CS might point towards an important drop of this neurotrophin prior to the onset of frank psychosis. The associations of peripheral BDNF with planning-abilities match previous findings.
Background:Gender differences in symptomatology in chronic schizophrenia and first episode psychosis patients have often been reported. However, little is known about gender differences in those at risk of psychotic disorders. This study investigated gender differences in symptomatology, drug use, comorbidity (i.e. substance use, affective and anxiety disorders) and global functioning in patients with an at-risk mental state (ARMS) for psychosis.Methods:The sample consisted of 336 ARMS patients (159 women) from the prodromal work package of the EUropean network of national schizophrenia networks studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI; 11 centers). Clinical symptoms, drug use, comorbidity and functioning were assessed at first presentation to an early detection center using structured interviews.Results:In unadjusted analyses, men were found to have significantly higher rates of negative symptoms and current cannabis use while women showed higher rates of general psychopathology and more often displayed comorbid affective and anxiety disorders. No gender differences were found for global functioning. The results generally did not change when corrected for possible cofounders (e.g. cannabis use). However, most differences did not withstand correction for multiple testing.Conclusions:Findings indicate that gender differences in symptomatology and comorbidity in ARMS are similar to those seen in overt psychosis and in healthy controls. However, observed differences are small and would only be reliably detected in studies with high statistical power. Moreover, such small effects would likely not be clinically meaningful.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.