ArticleAnnals of general psychiatry2026
Prevalence and associated risk factors of psychotic experiences in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of general psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCOVID-19 is strongly associated with common mental disorders, but little is known about its association with psychotic experiences (PEs). Subclinical psychotic experiences, such as hallucinations and delusions, can precede psychotic disorders. This review sought to consolidate estimates and correlates of PEs in population-based samples during the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024499153). A systematic search in EMBASE, MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, APA PsycINFO, and other databases was conducted for relevant papers published between January 2020 (when COVID-19 was declared a worldwide health emergency) and September 30, 2024. Papers were included if they investigated the prevalence of self-reported PEs among people from the general public during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed based on the random-effects model, and the effect size was presented as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
resultsTwenty-five studies involving 264,504 adults were eligible. The prevalence of non-clinician administered self-reported PEs (12 studies) was 15.2% (pool). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that prevalence was higher in non-students compared to students (defined in the reference studies as individuals enrolled in college or university), those assessed during lockdown or quarantine than those assessed outside of lockdown or quarantine, and participants in Western versus non-Western countries. There was no meaningful difference between adolescents (≤ 24 years) and adults (> 24 years). Substantial heterogeneity (I² = 100%) was found, probably owing to differences in measurement instruments, participants, and settings.
conclusionThe results indicated that more than one-in-seven non-help-seeking individuals from the general public were screened as having self-reported PEs and a high-risk profile for psychosis during the pandemic. Elevated prevalence rates observed during lockdowns and among specific subgroups support the need for psychosis risk screening in public health strategies. Further research is needed to directly compare pre- and post-pandemic rates and explore long-term 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.