Search

ObjectiveYouths at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P) are characterized by a high prevalence of anxiety and depressive disorders. The present study aimed at developing and analyzing a network structure of CHR-P symptom domains (i.e., positive, negative, disorganization, and general subclinical psychotic symptoms), depressive and anxiety symptoms, and general functioning.MethodsNetwork analysis was applied to data on 111 CHR-P children and adolescents (Mage = 14.1), who were assessed using the Structured Interview for Prodromal Syndromes, the Children’s Depression Inventory, the Children’s Global Assessment Scale, and the Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children.ResultsIn the network, negative and disorganization symptoms showed the strongest association (r = 0.71), and depressive and anxiety symptoms showed dense within-domain connections, with a main bridging role played by physical symptoms of anxiety. The positive symptom cluster was not associated with any other node. The network stability coefficient (CS) was slightly below 0.25, and observed correlations observed ranged from 0.35 to 0.71.ConclusionThe lack of association between subclinical positive symptoms and other network variables confirmed the independent nature of subclinical positive symptoms from comorbid symptoms, which were found to play a central role in the analyzed network. Complex interventions should be developed to target positive and comorbid symptoms, prioritizing those with the most significant impact on functioning and the most relevance for the young individual, through a shared decision-making process. Importantly, the results suggest that negative and disorganization symptoms, as well as depressive and anxiety symptoms, may be targeted simultaneously.

Introduction: While the majority of young people who meet the criteria for being considered at increased risk of psychosis do not go on to develop a psychotic disorder, young people are currently being identified and treated in early intervention services. Ethical concerns have been raised concerning the decision about whether or not to provide treatment, and if so, what type of treatment. This study sought to support young people themselves to make these decisions with support from their clinician through a shared decision-making approach, facilitated by an online decision aid.Methods: This project used the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) to guide the development and piloting of an online decision aid across two phases: (1) qualitative, semi-structured focus groups with young people who were past clients and clinicians from an early psychosis service; and (2) pilot testing of the decision aid with clinicians and young people who were current clients to finalize the development.Results: Issues discussed by clinicians in the focus group were grouped into three main areas: (1) engagement phase; (2) assessment and priorities for treatment; and (3) initial and ongoing decision making. Clients focused on the context in which the decisions were made, including as they experienced initial feelings of resistance, and then acceptance of efforts made to describe and treat their mental health challenges. Clients highlighted the need for collaboration between themselves and their clinician, and the need to be equipped with the knowledge and tools to take care of themselves. These focus group data were used to refine the online decision aid. Pilot testing revealed that while it was overall useful and relevant, important limitations were noted by both clients and clinicians.Discussion: The use of a decision aid to facilitate shared decision making (SDM) in this area is feasible and has utility for both clients and clinicians. Use of such a tool can help to address the need to uphold the rights of young people as decision makers about their own care. Future efforts should embed decision aids within complex SDM interventions, and research to understand issues relating to implementation of these interventions.

Most psychiatric disorders develop during adolescence and young adulthood and are preceded by a phase during which attenuated or episodic symptoms and functional decline are apparent. The introduction of the ultra-high risk (UHR) criteria two decades ago created a new framework for identification of risk and for pre-emptive psychiatry, focusing on first episode psychosis as an outcome. Research in this paradigm demonstrated the comorbid, diffuse nature of emerging psychopathology and a high degree of developmental heterotopy, suggesting the need to adopt a broader, more agnostic approach to risk identification. Guided by the principles of clinical staging, we introduce the concept of a pluripotent at-risk mental state. The clinical high at risk mental state (CHARMS) approach broadens identification of risk beyond psychosis, encompassing multiple exit syndromes such as mania, severe depression, and personality disorder. It does not diagnostically differentiate the early stages of psychopathology, but adopts a “pluripotent” approach, allowing for overlapping and heterotypic trajectories and enabling the identification of both transdiagnostic and specific risk factors. As CHARMS is developed within the framework of clinical staging, clinical utility is maximized by acknowledging the dimensional nature of clinical phenotypes, while retaining thresholds for introducing specific interventions. Preliminary data from our ongoing CHARMS cohort study (N = 114) show that 34% of young people who completed the 12-month follow-up assessment (N = 78) transitioned from Stage 1b (attenuated syndrome) to Stage 2 (full disorder). While not without limitations, this broader risk identification approach might ultimately allow reliable, transdiagnostic identification of young people in the early stages of severe mental illness, presenting further opportunities for targeted early intervention and prevention strategies.