4.5 Article

An initial investigation of abnormal bodily phenomena in subjects at ultra high risk for psychosis: Their prevalence and clinical implications

期刊

COMPREHENSIVE PSYCHIATRY
卷 66, 期 -, 页码 39-45

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2015.12.005

关键词

-

资金

  1. Maudsley Philosophy Group
  2. Wellcome Trust
  3. MRC [G0700995, MC_U120097115] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Medical Research Council [1116129, MC_U120097115, G0700995] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Contemporary phenomenological research has considered abnormal bodily phenomena (ABP) to be a phenotypic trait of subjects with schizophrenia in their first psychotic episode. Yet the prevalence of ABP and their clinical significance in subjects at Ultra High Risk (UHR) of psychosis remain unidentified. This study is an exploratory investigation of ABP in UHR subjects and matched healthy controls (HCs) examining their relation to clinical features and basic self-disturbances. Methods: A sample of 26 UHR and 14 HC subjects from three prodromal and early intervention clinics in South London, West London and Cambridge was assessed with the Abnormal Bodily Phenomena questionnaire (ABPq), Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS), the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS) and the Examination of Anomalous Self Experiences (EASE) checklist. Results: In our sample ABP occurred in 73.1% ofUHR subjects and prominent ABP (proABP) were refentd in 53.8% ofthem. No HC subject reported ABP. The UHR. group with proABP had lower CAARMS total score (t = -9265, p = 0.006). There were no differences in PANSS total score (t = -1235, p = 0.277), SOFAS score (H(2) 2227, p = 0.666) and EASE total scores (z = -8565, adjusted p = 0.185) in the UHR. subjects with prominent ABP versus those that did not Discussion: This initial investigation suggests that ABP could be a prevalent phenotypic feature of UHR subjects. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据