ArticleEarly intervention in psychiatry2026
Exposure to Antipsychotics in Youths at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Low VS High Doses and Their Relevance for Clinical Outcomes.
Article in Early intervention in 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPredicting prognosis in subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis (CHR-P) is still challenging. In particular, there are some disregarded factors such as ongoing Antipsychotic (AP) treatment that potentially induce method errors and research bias. The specific purpose of this examination was to examine whether baseline AP exposure and its dosage identify different CHR-P groups with diverse prognostic outcomes across 2 years of follow-up.
methods182 CHR-P participants (93 AP-naïve, 60 low-dose AP, 33 high-dose AP) were assessed for a broad range of clinical outcomes, including psychosis transition, clinical and functional remission (measured with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale). Inter-group comparisons were explored using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and binary logistic regression analyses.
resultsAcross the follow-up, the high-dose AP subgroup showed an increased risk of new hospitalisation and poorer functional remission compared to AP-naïve participants. Conversely, the low-dose AP subsample had a higher 2-year rate of symptomatic remission and a lower 2-year rate of self-harm behaviour compared to AP-naïve one.
conclusionAPs at low doses are associated with better symptomatic outcomes, whilst APs at high doses correlate to poorer socio-occupational functioning. Promoting personalised treatment strategies and facilitating the identification of specific CHR-P subgroups with divergent prognoses are recommended in clinical practise.
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.