Prevalence and burden of at-risk criteria of psychosis and help-seeking behaviour: a population survey
Description: <p style='line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;'>Early detection and treatment of persons with first signs of emerging psychosis is currently regarded the most promising strategy to reduce the enormous disability and costs associated with psychotic disorders. To this, two complementary sets of at-risk criteria are currently used: (1) ‘ultra high risk’ criteria including attenuated psychotic symptoms, brief limited intermittent psychotic symptoms and a combination of a genetic risk factor and a recent persistent significant decline in functioning and (2) the basic symptom criteria ‘cognitive-perceptive basic symptoms’ and ‘cognitive disturbances’. These, however, have as yet only been studied in selected samples of help-seeking at-risk persons that must be assumed a non-representative minority of the at-risk population. Thus, one of the main questions regarding the clinical validity of at-risk criteria is still unanswered: Do current at-risk criteria reflect behaviours so common among adolescents and young adults that a valid distinction between ill and non-ill persons is difficult? </p><p style='line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;'>To answer this question, the aims of this study are to assess (1) the 3-month prevalence of persons fulfilling at least one at-risk criterion in a sample of 2’750 persons from the general population of the Canton Bern (age 16 to 40), (2) their co-morbidity, psychosocial functioning and quality of life , and (3) rate and predictors of help-seeking in participants with at-risk criteria. Assessments will be carried out by trained psychologist on the telephone. </p>The findings of this study will be of high value for the development of future early detection strategies. (1) If at-risk criteria at population level are rather frequent phenomena of no clinical significance, screening procedures based on these criteria but also awareness and information campaigns might do more harm than good by pathologising non-clinical experiences and, consequently, by bringing persons into (potentially harmful) treatment who would not have sought help without these screenings or campaigns. In this case, at-risk criteria have to be improved, e.g., by the inclusion of severe distress or disability as an obligatory criterion. (2) On the other hand, if the prevalence of at-risk criteria was low and their presence distressing or disabling, encouraging help-seeking would be mandatory. Thereby, knowledge of variables facilitating and hindering help-seeking is important for the development of awareness and information campaigns. Yet, one way or the other, persons at risk of developing psychosis will greatly profit from the results of this study.
Amount: CHF 227,000
Funding type: research
Funder scheme: Project funding
Start date: 2011-09-01
End date: 2014-06-30
Investigator: Schultze-Lutter, Frauke
Institution: University of Berne – BE
Funded outputs count: 16
Funder award ID: 135381
OpenAlex ID: G7982863221