ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2026
Protective Factors Predict Resilient Outcomes in Clinical High-Risk Youth with the Highest Individualized Psychosis Risk Scores.
Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing Health for Canadian Youth at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: A Feasibility Study: Optimiser la santé des jeunes Canadiens présentant un risque clinique élevé de psychose : Une étude de faisabilité.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2026Trial
- Predictors and Moderators of Long-Term Outcome of Persons at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Methods and Preliminary Data.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and hypothesisStudying 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
designCHR 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.
conclusionsThe 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.