Aims The at-risk mental state (ARMS) describes individuals at high risk of developing schizophrenia or psychosis. This study aimed at exploring the demographic characteristics of individuals who transitioned to psychosis from a large multicenter factorial design trial. Methods This was a secondary analysis of large multicenter randomised controlled trial of minocycline and/or omega-3 fatty acids added to treatment as usual for at-risk mental states. Participants (n = 326) were randomised to minocycline, omega-3, combined minocycline and omega-3 or to double placebo for 6 months. The primary outcome was transition to psychosis at 12 months. Results Forty-five (13.8%) participants transitioned to psychosis. The mean age of participants was 23.31 (5.31 SD) and 15.6% no formal education, 8.9% primary, 48.9% matriculation, 8.9% intermediate and 15.6% graduation and above. Majority 66% of participants were male and 71.1% single, 66.7% living in a joint family, 44.4% were employed, 24% students, 17.8% household/housewife and 3% unemployed. Interestingly 36.8% participants had a family history of psychosis, followed by 21.0% any unknown mental illnesses, 15.8% bipolar disorder, 15.8% depression, 5.3% anxiety and 5.3% intellectual disability. The mean total score for the Prodromal Questionnaire was 8.93, with a standard deviation of 1.67. The mean score on the Comprehensive Assessment for At Risk Mental State (CAARMS) unusual thoughts was 3.98 (SD = 0.84), Non-Bizarre Ideas 3.64 (SD = 0.77), Perceptual Abnormalities 3.76 (SD = 0.71) and disorganized speech 2.49 (SD = 1.12). Participants had mean Social and Occupational Functioning (SOFAS) score of 66.67 which suggests moderate difficulty in social, occupational, or school functioning (e.g., few friends, conflicts with peers or co-workers). Conclusion Transition to psychosis appears to have different demographic and clinical correlates which may have the causal relationship to transition. The cross-comparative studies are warranted to understand differences and similarities between the groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khoso et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: