Schizophrenia bulletin · 2026
Protective Factors Predict Resilient Outcomes in Clinical High-Risk Youth with the Highest Individualized Psychosis Risk Scores.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cadenhead Kristin S, Addington Jean, Bearden Carrie E, Cannon Tyrone D, Cornblatt Barbara A, Keshavan Matcheri, Mathalon Daniel H, Perkins Diana O, Stone William, Walker Elaine F, Woods Scott W
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Studying individuals at Clinical High Risk (CHR) for psychosis provides an opportunity to examine protective factors that predict resilient outcomes. Here, we present a model for the study of protective factors in CHR participants at the very highest risk for psychotic conversion based on the Psychosis Risk Calculator.
STUDY DESIGN: CHR participants (N = 572) from NAPLS3 were assessed on the Risk Calculator. Those who scored in the top half of the distribution and had 2 years of follow-up (N = 136) were divided into those who did not convert to psychosis (resilient, N = 90) and those who did (nonresilient, N = 46). Groups were compared based on candidate protective factors that were not part of the Risk Calculator. Better functional outcome was also examined as an outcome measure of resiliency. Study Results: Exploratory analyses suggest that Hispanic heritage, social engagement, desirable life experiences, premorbid functioning and IQ are all potential protective factors that predict resilient outcomes. Reduced startle reactivity, brain area and volume were also associated with greater resilience.
CONCLUSIONS: The primary focus of CHR research has been the risk and prediction of psychosis, while less is known about protective factors. Clearly, a supportive childhood environment, positive experiences, and educational enrichment may contribute to better premorbid functioning and brain development, which in turn contribute to more resilient outcomes. Therapies focused on enhancing protective factors in the CHR population are logical preventive interventions that may benefit this vulnerable population. Future CHR research might use similar models to develop a "protective index" to predict resilient outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN: CHR participants (N = 572) from NAPLS3 were assessed on the Risk Calculator. Those who scored in the top half of the distribution and had 2 years of follow-up (N = 136) were divided into those who did not convert to psychosis (resilient, N = 90) and those who did (nonresilient, N = 46). Groups were compared based on candidate protective factors that were not part of the Risk Calculator. Better functional outcome was also examined as an outcome measure of resiliency. Study Results: Exploratory analyses suggest that Hispanic heritage, social engagement, desirable life experiences, premorbid functioning and IQ are all potential protective factors that predict resilient outcomes. Reduced startle reactivity, brain area and volume were also associated with greater resilience.
CONCLUSIONS: The primary focus of CHR research has been the risk and prediction of psychosis, while less is known about protective factors. Clearly, a supportive childhood environment, positive experiences, and educational enrichment may contribute to better premorbid functioning and brain development, which in turn contribute to more resilient outcomes. Therapies focused on enhancing protective factors in the CHR population are logical preventive interventions that may benefit this vulnerable population. Future CHR research might use similar models to develop a "protective index" to predict resilient outcomes.