Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Machine learning techniques were used to identify highly informative early psychosis self-report items and to validate an early psychosis screener (EPS) against the Structured Interview for Psychosis-risk Syndromes (SIPS). The Prodromal Questionnaire-Brief Version (PQ-B) and 148 additional items were administered to 229 individuals being screened with the SIPS at 7 North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study sites and at Columbia University. Fifty individuals were found to have SIPS scores of 0, 1, or 2, making them clinically low risk (CLR) controls; 144 were classified as clinically high risk (CHR) (SIPS 3-5) and 35 were found to have first episode psychosis (FEP) (SIPS 6). Spectral clustering analysis, performed on 124 of the items, yielded two cohesive item groups, the first mostly related to psychosis and mania, the second mostly related to depression, anxiety, and social and general work/school functioning. Items within each group were sorted according to their usefulness in distinguishing between CLR and CHR individuals using the Minimum Redundancy Maximum Relevance procedure. A receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis indicated that maximal differentiation of CLR and CHR participants was achieved with a 26-item solution (AUC=0.899±0.001). The EPS-26 outperformed the PQ-B (AUC=0.834±0.001). For screening purposes, the self-report EPS-26 appeared to differentiate individuals who are either CLR or CHR approximately as well as the clinician-administered SIPS. The EPS-26 may prove useful as a self-report screener and may lead to a decrease in the duration of untreated psychosis. A validation of the EPS-26 against actual conversion is underway.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6051928 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2017.11.030 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!