Only 1 in 4 Considered at High Risk for Psychosis Actually Progress to Psychosis

Kermit Cole
3
55

Saying that a “high risk” status “must not necessarily reflect inherent psychosis risk,” researchers from Switzerland, the Netherlands, and London find that almost half of those deemed at risk remitted fully and three-quarters did not progress to overt psychosis. The researchers voice “serious concern” about stigmatization of “troubled but possibly healthy individuals.”

Abstract → 

Siman, A., Borgwardt, S., Reicher-Rossler, A., Vethorst, E., de Haan, L., Fusar-Poli, P; Moving beyond transition outcomes: Meta-analysis of remission rates in individuals at high clinical risk for psychosis. Psychiatry Research. Online July 18, 2013

Of further interest:
Psychosis prodrome rarely converts to psychotic illness (Medwire News)

Previous article“The Nudge Debate”;
“Science is not Your Enemy”
Next article“Lawyers of Sound Mind”
Kermit Cole
Kermit Cole, MFT, founding editor of Mad in America, works in Santa Fe, New Mexico as a couples and family therapist. Inspired by Open Dialogue, he works as part of a team and consults with couples and families that have members identified as patients. His work in residential treatment — largely with severely traumatized and/or "psychotic" clients — led to an appreciation of the power and beauty of systemic philosophy and practice, as the alternative to the prevailing focus on individual pathology. A former film-maker, he has undergraduate and master's degrees in psychology from Harvard University, as well as an MFT degree from the Council for Relationships in Philadelphia. He is a doctoral candidate with the Taos Institute and the Free University of Brussels. You can reach him at [email protected]

3 COMMENTS

  1. Claiming that labeling somebody “high risk” for later being labeled ‘psychotic’ “must not necessarily reflect inherent risk of being labeled psychotic” experts on states of mind they’ve never experienced themselves, funded by confiscated tax dollars from Switzerland, the Netherlands, and London declare that almost half of those labeled fated to be at risk of winding up labeled ‘psychotic’ later were unlabeled as being at risk of being labeled ‘psychotic’ and three-quarters did not progress to being overtly labeled psychotic by these experts on states of mind they’ve never experienced. The researchers are content to keep stigmatizing those they feel really deserve to the social death sentence of being labeled psychotic but voice “serious concern” about stigmatization of “troubled but possibly healthy individuals.” They believe believing you’re the virgin Mary represents a ‘health’ event. No word yet on whether believing you’re an expert on states of mind you’ve never experienced makes one ‘unhealthy’.

    It’s these researchers themselves that shovel some more soil on the graves daily of people whose experiences they mystify in their pathetic scientism language. Just listen to them! ‘prodrome’… my god…

    • You’d think they’d have “serious concern” about the legitimacy of their predictive model, and perhaps some “serious concern” that they didn’t know their butt from a hole in the ground. I have “serious concern” that anyone takes a thing they say seriously.

      —- Steve

LEAVE A REPLY