A critique of the “ultra‐high risk” and “transition” paradigm

The transdiagnostic expression of psychotic experiences in common mental disorder (anxiety/depression/substance use disorder) is associated with a poorer prognosis, and a small minority of people may indeed develop a clinical picture that meets criteria for schizophrenia. However, it appears neither useful nor valid to observe early states of multidimensional psychopathology in young people through the “schizo”‐prism, and apply misleadingly simple, unnecessary and inefficient binary concepts of “risk” and “transition”. A review of the “ultra‐high risk” (UHR) or “clinical high risk” (CHR) literature indicates that UHR/CHR samples are highly heterogeneous and represent individuals diagnosed with common mental disorder (anxiety/depression/substance use disorder) and a degree of psychotic experiences. Epidemiological research has shown that psychotic experiences are a (possibly non‐causal) marker of the severity of multidimensional psychopathology, driving poor outcome, yet notions of “risk” and “transition” in UHR/CHR research are restrictively defined on the basis of positive psychotic phenomena alone, ignoring how baseline differences in multidimensional psychopathology may differentially impact course and outcome. The concepts of “risk” and “transition” in UHR/CHR research are measured on the same dimensional scale, yet are used to produce artificial diagnostic shifts. In fact, “transition” in UHR/CHR research occurs mainly as a function of variable sample enrichment strategies rather than the UHR/CHR “criteria” themselves. Furthermore, transition rates in UHR/CHR research are inflated as they do not exclude false positives associated with the natural fluctuation of dimensional expression of psychosis. Biological associations with “transition” thus likely represent false positive findings, as was the initial claim of strong effects of omega‐3 polyunsatured fatty acids in UHR samples. A large body of UHR/CHR intervention research has focused on the questionable outcome of “transition”, which shows lack of correlation with functional outcome. It may be more productive to consider the full range of person‐specific psychopathology in all young individuals who seek help for mental health problems, instead of “policing” youngsters for the transdiagnostic dimension of psychosis. Instead of the relatively inefficient medical high‐risk approach, a public health perspective, focusing on improved access to a low‐stigma, high‐hope, small scale and youth‐specific environment with acceptable language and interventions may represent a more useful and efficient strategy.     

Psychosis as a transdiagnostic and extended phenotype in the general population

A large body of research indicates that weak expressions of positive psychotic symptoms (“psychotic experiences”) can be measured in the general population, and likely represent the behavioural manifestation of distributed multifactorial (genetic and non‐genetic) risk for psychosis. Psychotic experiences are a transdiagnostic phenomenon: the majority of individuals with these experiences have a diagnosis of non‐psychotic disorder, particularly common mental disorder, in which psychotic experiences predict greater illness severity and poorer treatment response. Some of the people with common mental disorder and psychotic experiences will present to mental health services meeting criteria for “clinical high risk”. Treatment of the transdiagnostic dimension of psychosis in individuals with common mental disorder who meet “clinical high risk” criteria thus may improve outcome (which cannot be interpreted as prevention of “schizophrenia”). Subthreshold psychotic experiences are transitory in about 80% of individuals, while around 20% go on to develop persistent psychotic experiences and 7% a psychotic disorder, with an annual transition rate of 0.5‐1%. Persistence is associated, on the one hand, with environmental exposures, particularly childhood trauma, and, on the other, with network‐type dynamic interactions between psychotic experiences themselves (e.g., interactions between hallucinatory experiences and delusional ideation) and between symptom dimensions (e.g., interactions between affective symptoms and psychotic experiences, or interactions between subthreshold negative symptoms and psychotic experiences). The study of psychotic experiences is helping to elucidate the mechanisms by which environmental and genetic influences shape the transdiagnostic expression of psychosis proneness, that is mostly transitory but may first become persistent over time and eventually give rise to transition to a psychotic disorder.     

Association of preceding psychosis risk states and non‐psychotic mental disorders with incidence of clinical psychosis in the general population: a prospective study in the NEMESIS‐2 cohort

The validity and clinical utility of the concept of “clinical high risk” (CHR) for psychosis have so far been investigated only in risk‐enriched samples in clinical settings. In this population‐based prospective study, we aimed – for the first time – to assess the incidence rate of clinical psychosis and es­timate the population attributable fraction (PAF) of that incidence for preceding psychosis risk states and DSM‐IV diagnoses of non‐psychotic mental disorders (mood disorders, anxiety disorders, alcohol use disorders, and drug use disorders). All analyses were adjusted for age, gender and education. The incidence rate of clinical psychosis was 63.0 per 100,000 person‐years. The mutually‐adjusted Cox proportional hazards model indicated that preceding diagnoses of mood disorders (hazard ratio, HR=10.67, 95% CI: 3.12‐36.49), psychosis high‐risk state (HR=7.86, 95% CI: 2.76‐22.42) and drug use disorders (HR=5.33, 95% CI: 1.61‐17.64) were associated with an increased risk for clinical psychosis incidence. Of the clinical psychosis incidence in the population, 85.5% (95% CI: 64.6‐94.1) was attributable to prior psychopathology, with mood disorders (PAF=66.2, 95% CI: 33.4‐82.9), psychosis high‐risk state (PAF=36.9, 95% CI: 11.3‐55.1), and drug use disorders (PAF=18.7, 95% CI: –0.9 to 34.6) as the most important factors. Although the psychosis high‐risk state displayed a high relative risk for clinical psychosis outcome even after adjusting for other psychopathology, the PAF was comparatively low, given the low prevalence of psychosis high‐risk states in the population. These findings provide empirical evidence for the “prevention paradox” of targeted CHR early intervention. A comprehensive prevention strategy with a focus on broader psychopathology may be more effective than the current psychosis‐focused approach for achieving population‐based improvements in prevention of psychotic disorders.     

Transdiagnostic risk of mental disorders in offspring of affected parents: a meta-analysis of family high-risk and registry studies

The offspring of parents with mental disorders are at increased risk for developing mental disorders themselves. The risk to offspring may extend transdiagnostically to disorders other than those present in the parents. The literature on this topic is vast but mixed. To inform targeted prevention and genetic counseling, we performed a comprehensive, PRISMA 2020-compliant meta-analysis. We systematically searched the literature published up to September 2022 to retrieve original family high-risk and registry studies reporting on the risk of mental disorders in offspring of parents with any type of mental disorder. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of the relative risk (risk ratio, RR) and absolute risk (lifetime, up to the age at assessment) of mental disorders, defined according to the ICD or DSM. Cumulative incidence by offspring age was determined using meta-analytic Kaplan-Meier curves. We measured heterogeneity with the I² statistic, and risk of bias with the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. Sensitivity analyses addressed the impact of study design (family high-risk vs. registry) and specific vs. transdiagnostic risks. Transdiagnosticity was appraised with the TRANSD criteria. We identified 211 independent studies that reported data on 3,172,115 offspring of parents with psychotic, bipolar, depressive, disruptive, attention-deficit/hyperactivity, anxiety, substance use, eating, obsessive-compulsive, and borderline personality disorders, and 20,428,575 control offspring. The RR and lifetime risk of developing any mental disorder were 3.0 and 55% in offspring of parents with anxiety disorders; 2.6 and 17% in offspring of those with psychosis; 2.1 and 55% in offspring of those with bipolar disorder; 1.9 and 51% in offspring of those with depressive disorders; and 1.5 and 38% in offspring of those with substance use disorders. The offspring's RR and lifetime risk of developing the same mental disorder diagnosed in their parent were 8.4 and 32% for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; 5.8 and 8% for psychosis; 5.1 and 5% for bipolar disorder; 2.8 and 9% for substance use disorders; 2.3 and 14% for depressive disorders; 2.3 and 1% for eating disorders; and 2.2 and 31% for anxiety disorders. There were 37 significant transdiagnostic associations between parental mental disorders and the RR of developing a different mental disorder in the offspring. In offspring of parents with psychosis, bipolar and depressive disorder, the risk of the same disorder onset emerged at 16, 5 and 6 years, and cumulated to 3%, 19% and 24% by age 18; and to 8%, 36% and 46% by age 28. Heterogeneity ranged from 0 to 0.98, and 96% of studies were at high risk of bias. Sensitivity analyses restricted to prospective family high-risk studies confirmed the pattern of findings with similar RR, but with greater absolute risks compared to analyses of all study types. This study demonstrates at a global, meta-analytic level that offspring of affected parents have strongly elevated RR and lifetime risk of developing any mental disorder as well as the same mental disorder diagnosed in the parent. The transdiagnostic risks suggest that offspring of parents with a range of mental disorders should be considered as candidates for targeted primary prevention.     

Age matters in the prevalence and clinical significance of ultra‐high‐risk for psychosis symptoms and criteria in the general population: Findings from the BEAR and BEARS‐kid studies

Early detection of psychosis is an important topic in psychiatry. Yet, there is limited information on the prevalence and clinical significance of high‐risk symptoms in children and adolescents as compared to adults. We examined ultra‐high‐risk (UHR) symptoms and criteria in a sample of individuals aged 8‐40 years from the general population of Canton Bern, Switzerland, enrolled from June 2011 to May 2014. The current presence of attenuated psychotic symptoms (APS) and brief intermittent psychotic symptoms (BLIPS) and the fulfillment of onset/worsening and frequency requirements for these symptoms in UHR criteria were assessed using the Structured Interview for Psychosis Risk Syndromes. Additionally, perceptive and non‐perceptive APS were differentiated. Psychosocial functioning and current non‐psychotic DSM‐IV axis I disorders were also surveyed. Well‐trained psychologists performed assessments. Altogether, 9.9% of subjects reported APS and none BLIPS, and 1.3% met all the UHR requirements for APS. APS were related to more current axis I disorders and impaired psychosocial functioning, indicating some clinical significance. A strong age effect was detected around age 16: compared to older individuals, 8‐15‐year olds reported more perceptive APS, that is, unusual perceptual experiences and attenuated hallucinations. Perceptive APS were generally less related to functional impairment, regardless of age. Conversely, non‐perceptive APS were related to low functioning, although this relationship was weaker in those below age 16. Future studies should address the differential effects of perceptive and non‐perceptive APS, and their interaction with age, also in terms of conversion to psychosis.     

Prediction of psychosis across protocols and risk cohorts using automated language analysis

Language and speech are the primary source of data for psychiatrists to diagnose and treat mental disorders. In psychosis, the very structure of language can be disturbed, including semantic coherence (e.g., derailment and tangentiality) and syntactic complexity (e.g., concreteness). Subtle disturbances in language are evident in schizophrenia even prior to first psychosis onset, during prodromal stages. Using computer‐based natural language processing analyses, we previously showed that, among English‐speaking clinical (e.g., ultra) high‐risk youths, baseline reduction in semantic coherence (the flow of meaning in speech) and in syntactic complexity could predict subsequent psychosis onset with high accuracy. Herein, we aimed to cross‐validate these automated linguistic analytic methods in a second larger risk cohort, also English‐speaking, and to discriminate speech in psychosis from normal speech. We identified an automated machine‐learning speech classifier – comprising decreased semantic coherence, greater variance in that coherence, and reduced usage of possessive pronouns – that had an 83% accuracy in predicting psychosis onset (intra‐protocol), a cross‐validated accuracy of 79% of psychosis onset prediction in the original risk cohort (cross‐protocol), and a 72% accuracy in discriminating the speech of recent‐onset psychosis patients from that of healthy individuals. The classifier was highly correlated with previously identified manual linguistic predictors. Our findings support the utility and validity of automated natural language processing methods to characterize disturbances in semantics and syntax across stages of psychotic disorder. The next steps will be to apply these methods in larger risk cohorts to further test reproducibility, also in languages other than English, and identify sources of variability. This technology has the potential to improve prediction of psychosis outcome among at‐risk youths and identify linguistic targets for remediation and preventive intervention. More broadly, automated linguistic analysis can be a powerful tool for diagnosis and treatment across neuropsychiatry.     

Transdiagnostic dimensions of psychosis in the Bipolar‐Schizophrenia Network on Intermediate Phenotypes (B‐SNIP)

The validity of the classification of non‐affective and affective psychoses as distinct entities has been disputed, but, despite calls for alternative approaches to defining psychosis syndromes, there is a dearth of empirical efforts to identify transdiagnostic phenotypes of psychosis. We aimed to investigate the validity and utility of general and specific symptom dimensions of psychosis cutting across schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and bipolar I disorder with psychosis. Multidimensional item‐response modeling was conducted on symptom ratings of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Young Mania Rating Scale, and Montgomery‐Åsberg Depression Rating Scale in the multicentre Bipolar‐Schizophrenia Network on Intermediate Phenotypes (B‐SNIP) consortium, which included 933 patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia (N=397), schizoaffective disorder (N=224), or bipolar I disorder with psychosis (N=312). A bifactor model with one general symptom dimension, two distinct dimensions of non‐affective and affective psychosis, and five specific symptom dimensions of positive, negative, disorganized, manic and depressive symptoms provided the best model fit. There was further evidence on the utility of symptom dimensions for predicting B‐SNIP psychosis biotypes with greater accuracy than categorical DSM diagnoses. General, positive, negative and disorganized symptom dimension scores were higher in African American vs. Caucasian patients. Symptom dimensions accurately classified patients into categorical DSM diagnoses. This study provides evidence on the validity and utility of transdiagnostic symptom dimensions of psychosis that transcend traditional diagnostic boundaries of psychotic disorders. Findings further show promising avenues for research at the interface of dimensional psychopathological phenotypes and basic neurobiological dimensions of psychopathology.     

Ultra high risk status and transition to psychosis in 22q11.2 deletion syndrome

The 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11DS) is characterized by high rates of psychotic symptoms and schizophrenia, making this condition a promising human model for studying risk factors for psychosis. We explored the predictive value of ultra high risk (UHR) criteria in a sample of patients with 22q11DS. We also examined the additional contribution of socio‐demographic, clinical and cognitive variables to predict transition to psychosis within a mean interval of 32.5 ± 17.6 months after initial assessment. Eighty‐nine participants with 22q11DS (age range: 8‐30 years; mean 16.1 ± 4.7) were assessed using the Structured Interview for Psychosis‐Risk Syndromes. Information on Axis I diagnoses, internalizing and externalizing symptoms, level of functioning and IQ was also collected. At baseline, 22 (24.7%) participants met UHR criteria. Compared to those without a UHR condition, they had a significantly lower functioning, more frequent anxiety disorders, and more severe psychopathology. Transition rate to psychosis was 27.3% in UHR and 4.5% in non‐UHR participants. Cox regression analyses revealed that UHR status significantly predicted conversion to psychosis. Baseline level of functioning was the only other additional predictor. This is the first study investigating the predictive value of UHR criteria in 22q11DS. It indicates that the clinical path leading to psychosis is broadly comparable to that observed in other clinical high‐risk samples. Nevertheless, the relatively high transition rate in non‐UHR individuals suggests that other risk markers should be explored in this population. The role of low functioning as a predictor of transition to psychosis should also be investigated more in depth.     

Transdiagnostic psychiatry: a systematic review

The usefulness of current psychiatric classification, which is based on ICD/DSM categorical diagnoses, remains questionable. A promising alternative has been put forward as the “transdiagnostic” approach. This is expected to cut across existing categorical diagnoses and go beyond them, to improve the way we classify and treat mental disorders. This systematic review explores whether self‐defining transdiagnostic research meets such high expectations. A multi‐step Web of Science literature search was performed according to an a priori protocol, to identify all studies that used the word “transdiagnostic” in their title, up to May 5, 2018. Empirical variables which indexed core characteristics were extracted, complemented by a bibliometric and conceptual analysis. A total of 111 studies were included. Most studies were investigating interventions, followed by cognition and psychological processes, and neuroscientific topics. Their samples ranged from 15 to 91,199 (median 148) participants, with a mean age from 10 to more than 60 (median 33) years. There were several methodological inconsistencies relating to the definition of the gold standard (DSM/ICD diagnoses), of the outcome measures and of the transdiagnostic approach. The quality of the studies was generally low and only a few findings were externally replicated. The majority of studies tested transdiagnostic features cutting across different diagnoses, and only a few tested new classification systems beyond the existing diagnoses. About one fifth of the studies were not transdiagnostic at all, because they investigated symptoms and not disorders, a single disorder, or because there was no diagnostic information. The bibliometric analysis revealed that transdiagnostic research largely restricted its focus to anxiety and depressive disorders. The conceptual analysis showed that transdiagnostic research is grounded more on rediscoveries than on true innovations, and that it is affected by some conceptual biases. To date, transdiagnostic approaches have not delivered a credible paradigm shift that can impact classification and clinical care. Practical “TRANSD”iagnostic recommendations are proposed here to guide future research in this field.     

Early intervention in psychosis: concepts,evidence and future directions

The rise of the early intervention paradigm in psychotic disorders represents a maturing of the therapeutic approach in psychiatry, as it embraces practical preventive strategies which are firmly established in mainstream health care. Early intervention means better access and systematic early delivery of existing and incremental improvements in knowledge rather than necessarily requiring dramatic and elusive breakthroughs. A clinical staging model has proven useful and may have wider utility in psychiatry. The earliest clinical stages of psychotic disorder are non-specific and multidimensional and overlap phenotypically with the initial stages of other disorders. This implies that treatment should proceed in a stepwise fashion depending upon safety, response and progression. Withholding treatment until severe and less reversible symptomatic and functional impairment have become entrenched represents a failure of care. While early intervention in psychosis has developed strongly in recent years, many countries have made no progress at all, and others have achieved only sparse coverage. The reform process has been substantially evidence-based, arguably more so than other system reforms in mental health. However, while evidence is necessary, it is insufficient. It is also a by-product as well as a catalyst of reform. In early psychosis, we have also seen the evidence-based paradigm misused to frustrate overdue reform. Mental disorders are the chronic diseases of the young, with their onset and maximum impact in late adolescence and early adult life. A broader focus for early intervention would solve many of the second order issues raised by the early psychosis reform process, such as diagnostic uncertainty despite a clear-cut need for care, stigma and engagement, and should be more effective in mobilizing community support. Early intervention represents a vital and challenging project for early adopters in global psychiatry to consider.     

Clinical,socio‐demographic and psychological characteristics in individuals with persistent psychotic experiences with and without a “need for care”

Individuals reporting persistent psychotic experiences (PEs) in the general population, but without a “need for care”, are a unique group of particular importance in identifying risk and protective factors for psychosis. We compared people with persistent PEs and no “need for care” (non‐clinical, N=92) with patients diagnosed with a psychotic disorder (clinical, N=84) and controls without PEs (N=83), in terms of their phenomenological, socio‐demographic and psychological features. The 259 participants were recruited from one urban and one rural area in the UK, as part of the UNIQUE (Unusual Experiences Enquiry) study. Results showed that the non‐clinical group experienced hallucinations in all modalities as well as first‐rank symptoms, with an earlier age of onset than in the clinical group. Somatic/tactile hallucinations were more frequent than in the clinical group, while commenting and conversing voices were rare. Participants in the non‐clinical group were differentiated from their clinical counterparts by being less paranoid and deluded, apart from ideas of reference, and having fewer cognitive difficulties and negative symptoms. Unlike the clinical group, they were characterized neither by low psychosocial functioning nor by social adversity. However, childhood trauma featured in both groups. They were similar to the controls in psychological characteristics: they did not report current emotional problems, had intact self‐esteem, displayed healthy schemas about the self and others, showed high life satisfaction and well‐being, and high mindfulness. These findings support biopsychosocial models postulating that environmental and psychological factors interact with biological processes in the aetiology of psychosis. While some PEs may be more malign than others, lower levels of social and environmental adversity, combined with protective factors such as intact IQ, spirituality, and psychological and emotional well‐being, may reduce the likelihood of persistent PEs leading to pathological outcomes. Future research should focus on protective factors and determinants of well‐being in the context of PEs, rather than exclusively on risk factors and biomarkers of disease states.     

A meta‐review of “lifestyle psychiatry”: the role of exercise,smoking, diet and sleep in the prevention and treatment of mental disorders

There is increasing academic and clinical interest in how “lifestyle factors” traditionally associated with physical health may also relate to mental health and psychological well‐being. In response, international and national health bodies are producing guidelines to address health behaviors in the prevention and treatment of mental illness. However, the current evidence for the causal role of lifestyle factors in the onset and prognosis of mental disorders is unclear. We performed a systematic meta‐review of the top‐tier evidence examining how physical activity, sleep, dietary patterns and tobacco smoking impact on the risk and treatment outcomes across a range of mental disorders. Results from 29 meta‐analyses of prospective/cohort studies, 12 Mendelian randomization studies, two meta‐reviews, and two meta‐analyses of randomized controlled trials were synthesized to generate overviews of the evidence for targeting each of the specific lifestyle factors in the prevention and treatment of depression, anxiety and stress‐related disorders, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Standout findings include: a) convergent evidence indicating the use of physical activity in primary prevention and clinical treatment across a spectrum of mental disorders; b) emerging evidence implicating tobacco smoking as a causal factor in onset of both common and severe mental illness; c) the need to clearly establish causal relations between dietary patterns and risk of mental illness, and how diet should be best addressed within mental health care; and d) poor sleep as a risk factor for mental illness, although with further research required to understand the complex, bidirectional relations and the benefits of non‐pharmacological sleep‐focused interventions. The potentially shared neurobiological pathways between multiple lifestyle factors and mental health are discussed, along with directions for future research, and recommendations for the implementation of these findings at public health and clinical service levels.     

Cortical Morphology Differences in Subjects at Increased Vulnerability for Developing a Psychotic Disorder: A Comparison between Subjects with Ultra-High Risk and 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome

IntroductionSubjects with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11DS) and subjects with ultra-high risk for psychosis (UHR) share a risk of approximately 30% to develop a psychotic disorder. Studying these groups helps identify biological markers of pathophysiological processes involved in the development of psychosis. Total cortical surface area (cSA), total cortical grey matter volume (cGMV), cortical thickness (CT), and local gyrification index (LGI) of the cortical structure have a distinct neurodevelopmental origin making them important target markers to study in relation to the development of psychosis.Results22q11DS subjects had lower total cSA and total cGMV compared to UHR and HC subjects. The 22q11DS subjects showed bilateral lower LGI in the i) prefrontal cortex, ii) precuneus, iii) precentral gyrus and iv) cuneus compared to UHR subjects. Additionally, lower LGI was found in the left i) fusiform gyrus and right i) pars opercularis, ii) superior, and iii) inferior temporal gyrus in 22q11DS subjects compared to HC. In comparison to 22q11DS subjects, the UHR subjects had lower CT of the insula. For both risk groups, positive symptom severity was negatively correlated to rostral middle frontal gyrus CT.ConclusionA shared negative correlation between positive symptom severity and rostral middle frontal gyrus CT in UHR and 22q11DS may be related to their increased vulnerability to develop a psychotic disorder. 22q11DS subjects were characterised by widespread lower degree of cortical gyrification linked to early and postnatal neurodevelopmental pathology. No implications for early neurodevelopmental pathology were found for the UHR subjects, although they did have distinctively lower insula CT which may have arisen from defective pruning processes during adolescence. Implications of these findings in relation to development of psychotic disorders are in need of further investigation in longitudinal studies.     

Transdiagnostic clinical staging in youth mental health: a first international consensus statement

Recognizing that current frameworks for classification and treatment in psychiatry are inadequate, particularly for use in young people and early intervention services, transdiagnostic clinical staging models have gained prominence. These models aim to identify where individuals lie along a continuum of illness, to improve treatment selection and to better understand patterns of illness continuity, discontinuity and aetiopathogenesis. All of these factors are particularly relevant to help‐seeking and mental health needs experienced during the peak age range of onset, namely the adolescent and young adult developmental periods (i.e., ages 12‐25 years). To date, progressive stages in transdiagnostic models have typically been defined by traditional symptom sets that distinguish “sub‐threshold” from “threshold‐level” disorders, even though both require clinical assessment and potential interventions. Here, we argue that staging models must go beyond illness progression to capture additional dimensions of illness extension as evidenced by emergence of mental or physical comorbidity/complexity or a marked change in a linked biological construct. To develop further consensus in this nascent field, we articulate principles and assumptions underpinning transdiagnostic clinical staging in youth mental health, how these models can be operationalized, and the implications of these arguments for research and development of new service systems. We then propose an agenda for the coming decade, including knowledge gaps, the need for multi‐stakeholder input, and a collaborative international process for advancing both science and implementation.     

Preventive psychiatry: a blueprint for improving the mental health of young people

Preventive approaches have latterly gained traction for improving mental health in young people. In this paper, we first appraise the conceptual foundations of preventive psychiatry, encompassing the public health, Gordon''s, US Institute of Medicine, World Health Organization, and good mental health frameworks, and neurodevelopmentally‐sensitive clinical staging models. We then review the evidence supporting primary prevention of psychotic, bipolar and common mental disorders and promotion of good mental health as potential transformative strategies to reduce the incidence of these disorders in young people. Within indicated approaches, the clinical high‐risk for psychosis paradigm has received the most empirical validation, while clinical high‐risk states for bipolar and common mental disorders are increasingly becoming a focus of attention. Selective approaches have mostly targeted familial vulnerability and non‐genetic risk exposures. Selective screening and psychological/psychoeducational interventions in vulnerable subgroups may improve anxiety/depressive symptoms, but their efficacy in reducing the incidence of psychotic/bipolar/common mental disorders is unproven. Selective physical exercise may reduce the incidence of anxiety disorders. Universal psychological/psychoeducational interventions may improve anxiety symptoms but not prevent depressive/anxiety disorders, while universal physical exercise may reduce the incidence of anxiety disorders. Universal public health approaches targeting school climate or social determinants (demographic, economic, neighbourhood, environmental, social/cultural) of mental disorders hold the greatest potential for reducing the risk profile of the population as a whole. The approach to promotion of good mental health is currently fragmented. We leverage the knowledge gained from the review to develop a blueprint for future research and practice of preventive psychiatry in young people: integrating universal and targeted frameworks; advancing multivariable, transdiagnostic, multi‐endpoint epidemiological knowledge; synergically preventing common and infrequent mental disorders; preventing physical and mental health burden together; implementing stratified/personalized prognosis; establishing evidence‐based preventive interventions; developing an ethical framework, improving prevention through education/training; consolidating the cost‐effectiveness of preventive psychiatry; and decreasing inequalities. These goals can only be achieved through an urgent individual, societal, and global level response, which promotes a vigorous collaboration across scientific, health care, societal and governmental sectors for implementing preventive psychiatry, as much is at stake for young people with or at risk for emerging mental disorders.     

Improving outcomes of first‐episode psychosis: an overview

Outcomes of psychotic disorders are associated with high personal, familiar, societal and clinical burden. There is thus an urgent clinical and societal need for improving those outcomes. Recent advances in research knowledge have opened new opportunities for ameliorating outcomes of psychosis during its early clinical stages. This paper critically reviews these opportunities, summarizing the state‐of‐the‐art knowledge and focusing on recent discoveries and future avenues for first episode research and clinical interventions. Candidate targets for primary universal prevention of psychosis at the population level are discussed. Potentials offered by primary selective prevention in asymptomatic subgroups (stage 0) are presented. Achievements of primary selected prevention in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis (stage 1) are summarized, along with challenges and limitations of its implementation in clinical practice. Early intervention and secondary prevention strategies at the time of a first episode of psychosis (stage 2) are critically discussed, with a particular focus on minimizing the duration of untreated psychosis, improving treatment response, increasing patients’ satisfaction with treatment, reducing illicit substance abuse and preventing relapses. Early intervention and tertiary prevention strategies at the time of an incomplete recovery (stage 3) are further discussed, in particular with respect to addressing treatment resistance, improving well‐being and social skills with reduction of burden on the family, treatment of comorbid substance use, and prevention of multiple relapses and disease progression. In conclusion, to improve outcomes of a complex, heterogeneous syndrome such as psychosis, it is necessary to globally adopt complex models integrating a clinical staging framework and coordinated specialty care programmes that offer pre‐emptive interventions to high‐risk groups identified across the early stages of the disorder. Only a systematic implementation of these models of care in the national health care systems will render these strategies accessible to the 23 million people worldwide suffering from the most severe psychiatric disorders.     

The effectiveness of psychodynamic psychotherapies: An update

This paper provides a comprehensive review of outcome studies and meta‐analyses of effectiveness studies of psychodynamic therapy (PDT) for the major categories of mental disorders. Comparisons with inactive controls (waitlist, treatment as usual and placebo) generally but by no means invariably show PDT to be effective for depression, some anxiety disorders, eating disorders and somatic disorders. There is little evidence to support its implementation for post‐traumatic stress disorder, obsessive‐compulsive disorder, bulimia nervosa, cocaine dependence or psychosis. The strongest current evidence base supports relatively long‐term psychodynamic treatment of some personality disorders, particularly borderline personality disorder. Comparisons with active treatments rarely identify PDT as superior to control interventions and studies are generally not appropriately designed to provide tests of statistical equivalence. Studies that demonstrate inferiority of PDT to alternatives exist, but are small in number and often questionable in design. Reviews of the field appear to be subject to allegiance effects. The present review recommends abandoning the inherently conservative strategy of comparing heterogeneous “families” of therapies for heterogeneous diagnostic groups. Instead, it advocates using the opportunities provided by bioscience and computational psychiatry to creatively explore and assess the value of protocol‐directed combinations of specific treatment components to address the key problems of individual patients.     

Clinical correlates of chronotypes in young persons with mental disorders

While important changes in circadian rhythms take place during adolescence and young adulthood, it is unclear how circadian profiles during this period relate to emerging mental disorders. This study aimed to: (i) characterise morningness–eveningness preference in young people with primary anxiety, depression, bipolar or psychotic disorders as compared to healthy controls, and (ii) to investigate associations between morningness–eveningness preference and the severity of psychiatric symptoms. Four hundred and ninety-six males and females aged between 12 and 30 years were divided into five groups according to primary diagnosis. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale were administered by a research psychologist and participants completed the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale and the Horne–Östberg Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (ME). ME scores were significantly lower (i.e. higher levels of “eveningness”) in all patient diagnosis subgroups compared to the control group. The psychosis group had higher ME scores than the depression and anxiety groups. Compared to the control group, the anxiety, depression and bipolar subgroups had a significantly higher proportion of “moderate evening” types, with a similar trend for the psychosis group. The proportion of “extreme evening” types was significantly higher in the anxiety and depression subgroups than in the control group. Lower ME scores correlated with worse psychological distress in males from the bipolar group. Lower ME scores correlated with higher depression severity in females with depression and in males with bipolar disorder. These results suggest that young persons with various mental disorders, especially those with affective disorders, present with a stronger “eveningness” preference and higher rates of evening chronotypes than healthy controls from the same age group. Later chronotypes were generally associated with worse psychological distress and symptoms severity. These associations were modulated by sex and primary diagnosis.     

What causes psychosis? An umbrella review of risk and protective factors

Psychosis is a heterogeneous psychiatric condition for which a multitude of risk and protective factors have been suggested. This umbrella review aimed to classify the strength of evidence for the associations between each factor and psychotic disorders whilst controlling for several biases. The Web of Knowledge database was searched to identify systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of observational studies which examined associations between socio‐demographic, parental, perinatal, later factors or antecedents and psychotic disorders, and which included a comparison group of healthy controls, published from 1965 to January 31, 2017. The literature search and data extraction followed PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. The association between each factor and ICD or DSM diagnoses of non‐organic psychotic disorders was graded into convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or non‐significant according to a standardized classification based on: number of psychotic cases, random‐effects p value, largest study 95% confidence interval, heterogeneity between studies, 95% prediction interval, small study effect, and excess significance bias. In order to assess evidence for temporality of association, we also conducted sensitivity analyses restricted to data from prospective studies. Fifty‐five meta‐analyses or systematic reviews were included in the umbrella review, corresponding to 683 individual studies and 170 putative risk or protective factors for psychotic disorders. Only the ultra‐high‐risk state for psychosis (odds ratio, OR=9.32, 95% CI: 4.91‐17.72) and Black‐Caribbean ethnicity in England (OR=4.87, 95% CI: 3.96‐6.00) showed convincing evidence of association. Six factors were highly suggestive (ethnic minority in low ethnic density area, second generation immigrants, trait anhedonia, premorbid IQ, minor physical anomalies, and olfactory identification ability), and nine were suggestive (urbanicity, ethnic minority in high ethnic density area, first generation immigrants, North‐African immigrants in Europe, winter/spring season of birth in Northern hemisphere, childhood social withdrawal, childhood trauma, Toxoplasma gondii IgG, and non‐right handedness). When only prospective studies were considered, the evidence was convincing for ultra‐high‐risk state and suggestive for urbanicity only. In summary, this umbrella review found several factors to be associated with psychotic disorders with different levels of evidence. These risk or protective factors represent a starting point for further etiopathological research and for the improvement of the prediction of psychosis.     

“Capacity”, “best interests”, “will and preferences” and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

The United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is the most up‐to‐date international legal instrument concerning the rights of persons with disabilities. Such persons are taken to include those with serious mental disorders. According to an authoritative interpretation of a crucial Article (Article 12 ‐ Equal recognition before the law) by the UN CRPD Committee, involuntary detention and treatment of people with mental health disabilities are prohibited under the Convention. Both conventional mental health law and “capacity‐based” law are deemed to violate the Convention. However, some other UN bodies are not in full agreement (for example, the UN Human Rights Committee and the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment), while others are less explicitly absolutist (for example, the Human Rights Council). Furthermore, strong criticisms of the position of the CRPD Committee have been mounted from a number of academic quarters. These criticisms center on whether the role of a person's ability to make a decision can be ignored, no matter the circumstances. Much of the above debate turns on the concept of “legal capacity” and the now often‐repeated precept that one must always respect the “will and preferences” of the person with a disability. However, “will and preferences” remains undefined. In this paper, I offer an analysis of “will and preferences” that can clarify interventions that may be acceptable or non‐acceptable under the terms of the UN Convention.