An open pilot trial of a behavioural intervention to reduce violence by young adults with early psychosis receiving treatment in an early intervention services setting: A protocol.

AIMS: Despite the public health impact of violence among young adults with psychosis, behavioural interventions to reduce the risk of engaging in violence remain rare. For young adults with early psychosis, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-based psychotherapy has efficacy in reducing impairment and improving functioning. However, no CBT-based intervention to reduce violence has been formally adapted for young adults with early psychosis. This protocol outlines the first clinical trial of a behavioural intervention to reduce violence for young adults with early psychosis. This study is set in an early intervention services (EIS) setting and seeks to adapt and pilot Psychological Intervention for Complex PTSD and Schizophrenia-Spectrum Disorder (PICASSO), a CBT-based intervention, through an iterative process utilizing mixed-methods assessments. METHODS: All research will occur at OnTrackNY, the largest EIS program in the United States. This study will consist of an open pilot trial, with four EIS clinicians delivering the intervention to one to two EIS participants per round. In this mixed-methods study, both quantitative measures (acceptability, feasibility and hypothesized mediators of target outcome collected on a weekly basis) and qualitative interviews (with EIS clinicians at weeks 4, 8 and 12) will be conducted. Transcripts will be analyzed using thematic content analysis. Two to three rounds of iterative modifications are anticipated (n = 10-16 EIS participants total). RESULTS: Recruitment began in February 2024 and is expected to continue over a 9-12-month period. CONCLUSIONS: Because violent behaviour causes interpersonal disruptions such as incarceration and increased caregiver burden, an innovative intervention to reduce violence risk could have broader health impact for this vulnerable population. Adapting the PICASSO intervention to the EIS setting will optimize its acceptability and feasibility by the intended target population.

Post-Roe v Wade psychiatry: legal, clinical, and ethical challenges in psychiatry under abortion bans.

In recent history, the world has witnessed a trend towards liberalization of abortion laws driven by an increasing understanding of the negative personal and public health consequences of criminalizing abortion. By contrast, several countries have recently implemented restrictive reproductive laws, joining the 112 countries where access to abortion care is banned completely or with narrow exceptions. On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned its landmark decisions in Roe v Wade that established abortion until the point of viability of the fetus as a constitutional right. After Roe v Wade having been overturned, it is projected that many women in the USA will be prevented from accessing safe abortion care. Importantly, abortion bans not only impose constraints on patient autonomy, they also restrict physicians' ability to practice evidence-based medicine, which will negatively impact psychiatric care. It is therefore crucial for the practicing psychiatrist to be familiar with this new legal landscape. In this Personal View, we aim to provide a topical overview to help clinicians gain a clear understanding of legal, clinical, and ethical responsibilities, focusing on the USA. We also discuss the reality that psychiatrists might be called upon to determine medical necessity for an abortion on psychiatric grounds, which is new for most US psychiatrists. We predict that psychiatrists will be confronted with very difficult situations in which lawful and ethical conduct might be incongruent, and that abortion bans will result in greater numbers of patients needing psychiatric care from a system that is ill-prepared for additional demands.

Pilot study of a decision aid on BRCA1/2 genetic testing among Orthodox Jewish women.

INTRODUCTION: Orthodox Jewish women face unique social, cultural, and religious factors that may influence uptake of BRCA1/2 genetic testing. We examined the impact of a web-based decision aid (DA) on BRCA1/2 genetic testing intention/completion among Orthodox Jewish women. We conducted a single-arm pilot study among 50 Orthodox Jewish women who were given access to a web-based DA entitled RealRisks and administered serial surveys at baseline and 1 and 6 months after exposure to the DA. Descriptive statistics were conducted for baseline characteristics and study measures. Comparisons were made to assess changes in study measures over time. Fifty Orthodox Jewish women enrolled in the study with a mean age of 43.9 years (standard deviation [SD] 14.6), 70% Modern Orthodox, 2% with personal history of breast cancer, and 68% and 16% with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer, respectively. At baseline, 27 (54%) participants intended to complete genetic testing. Forty-three participants (86%) completed RealRisks and the 1-month survey and 38 (76%) completed the 6-month survey. There was a significant improvement in BRCA1/2 genetic testing knowledge and decrease in decisional conflict after exposure to the DA. At 1 month, only 20 (46.5%) completed or intended to complete genetic testing (p = 0.473 compared to baseline). While the DA improved genetic testing knowledge and reduced decisional conflict, genetic testing intention/completion did not increase over time. Future interventions should directly address barriers to BRCA1/2 genetic testing uptake and include input from leaders in the Orthodox Jewish community. GOV ID: NCT03624088 (8/7/18).

Views of Genetic Testing for Autism Among Autism Self-Advocates: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Autism self-advocates' views regarding genetic tests for autism are important, but critical questions about their perspectives arise. METHODS: We interviewed 11 autism self-advocates, recruited through autism self-advocacy websites, for 1 h each. RESULTS: Interviewees viewed genetic testing and its potential pros and cons through the lens of their own indiviudal perceived challenges, needs and struggles, especially concerning stigma and discrimination, lack of accommodations and misunderstandings from society about autism, their particular needs for services, and being blamed by others and by themselves for autistic traits. Their views of genetic testing tended not to be binary, but rather depended on how the genetic test results would be used. Interviewees perceived pros of genetic testing both in general and with regard to themselves (e.g., by providing "scientific proof" of autism as a diagnosis and possibly increasing availability of services). But they also perceived disadvantages and limitations of testing (e.g., possible eugenic applications). Participants distinguished between what they felt would be best for themselves and for the autistic community as a whole. When asked if they would undergo testing for themselves, if offered, interviewees added several considerations (e.g., undergoing testing because they support science in general). Interviewees were divided whether a genetic diagnosis would or should reduce self-blame, and several were wary of testing unless treatment, prevention or societal attitudes changed. Weighing these competing pros and cons could be difficult. CONCLUSIONS: This study, the first to use in-depth qualitative interviews to assess views of autism self-advocates regarding genetic testing, highlights key complexities. Respondents felt that such testing is neither wholly good or bad in itself, but rather may be acceptable depending on how it is used, and should be employed in beneficial, not harmful ways. These findings have important implications for practice, education of multiple stakeholders, research, and policy.

Impact of a Genetic Diagnosis for a Child's Autism on Parental Perceptions.

Genetic testing is recommended as part of an autism assessment, and most parents support genetic testing for their minor children. However, the impact on parents of receiving a monogenetic/ copy number variant diagnosis for autism in their child is not well understood. To explore this, we surveyed and interviewed parents of children in the SPARK study, a study of autism that includes genetic testing. Surveys were administered one month before and one and 12 months after parents received their child's genetic result. Interviews were conducted approximately one month after results disclosure. A genetic diagnosis (GD) for their child appeared to reduce parents' sense of self-blame and feelings of guilt, and this impact was relatively stable. The data also indicate a modest impact on parents' actions related to the condition, perceptions of themselves, and some aspects of life planning for their child, as measured by quantitative instruments at one month and 12 months after receipt of results. Other measures of parental identity and expectations for their child, in contrast, showed little change following receipt of genetic findings. Overall, parents who were told that no GD was identified showed minimal changes in their responses over time. These results suggest a discernable but relatively limited impact of genetic test results on parents of children with autism. These results should be reassuring to clinicians caring for children with autism and are consistent with studies in other areas of medicine that have suggested that genetic results tend to have fewer effects-negative or positive-than were anticipated.

Patients' Suits Against Psychiatrists for Not Preventing the Patients' Criminal Acts.

Patients who allege negligent treatment by their psychiatrists can sue to be compensated for the harms they experience. But what if the harms result from a criminal act committed by the patient that the patient claims the psychiatrist should have prevented? A long-standing common law rule bars plaintiffs from being compensated for harms caused by their own wrongdoing. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recently considered the scope of this rule in the case of a psychiatric patient convicted of murder. Even when the rule is upheld, various exceptions may exist, and there is pressure to do away with an absolute bar on recovery of damages.

Understanding Social, Cultural, and Religious Factors Influencing Medical Decision-Making on BRCA1/2 Genetic Testing in the Orthodox Jewish Community.

INTRODUCTION: Although the prevalence of a pathogenic variant in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes is about 1:400 (0.25%) in the general population, the prevalence is as high as 1:40 (2.5%) among the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Despite cost-effective preventive measures for mutation carriers, Orthodox Jews constitute a cultural and religious group that requires different approaches to BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing relative to other groups. This study analyzed a dialog of key stakeholders and community members to explore factors that influence decision-making about BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing in the New York Orthodox Jewish community. METHODS: Qualitative research methods, based on Grounded Theory and Narrative Research, were utilized to analyze the narrative data collected from 49 key stakeholders and community members. A content analysis was conducted to identify themes; inter-rater reliability was 71%. RESULTS: Facilitators of genetic testing were a desire for preventive interventions and education, while barriers to genetic testing included negative emotions, feared impact on family/romantic relationships, cost, and stigma. Views differed on the role of religious leaders and healthcare professionals in medical decision-making. Education, health, and community were discussed as influential factors, and concerns were expressed about disclosure, implementation, and information needs. CONCLUSION: This study elicited the opinions of Orthodox Jewish women (decision-makers) and key stakeholders (influencers) who play critical roles in the medical decision-making process. The findings have broad implications for engaging community stakeholders within faith-based or culturally distinct groups to ensure better utilization of healthcare services for cancer screening and prevention designed to improve population health.

Return of polygenic risk scores in research: Stakeholders' views on the eMERGE-IV study.

Research on polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for common, genetically complex chronic diseases aims to improve health-related predictions, tailor risk-reducing interventions, and improve health outcomes. Yet, the study and use of PRSs in clinical settings raise equity, clinical, and regulatory challenges that can be greater for individuals from historically marginalized racial, ethnic, and other minoritized communities. As part of the National Human Genome Research Institute-funded Electronic Medical Records and Genomics IV Network, we conducted online focus groups with patients/community members, clinicians, and members of institutional review boards to explore their views on key issues, including PRS research, return of PRS results, clinical translation, and barriers and facilitators to health behavioral changes in response to PRS results. Across stakeholder groups, our findings indicate support for PRS development and a strong interest in having PRS results returned to research participants. However, we also found multi-level barriers and significant differences in stakeholders' views about what is needed and possible for successful implementation. These include researcher-participant interaction formats, health and genomic literacy, and a range of structural barriers, such as financial instability, insurance coverage, and the absence of health-supporting infrastructure and affordable healthy food options in poorer neighborhoods. Our findings highlight the need to revisit and implement measures in PRS studies (e.g., incentives and resources for follow-up care), as well as system-level policies to promote equity in genomic research and health outcomes.

Ethics in placebo-controlled, acute treatment trials in schizophrenia: Two rival ethical frameworks.

Placebo-controlled, acute treatment trials in schizophrenia enroll acutely symptomatic persons, randomize them to receive placebo or antipsychotic medication for several weeks, and evaluate whether symptoms improve. These trials can have scientific benefits, especially when they test drugs with novel mechanisms of action. However, the use of placebo is ethically problematic inasmuch as standard treatment is withheld and participants are subjected to prolonged psychotic symptoms and associated risks. We propose that both deontological (duty-based) and utilitarian analyses are relevant, that it may be impossible to satisfy the ideals of both frameworks, and that researchers who conduct these trials will unavoidably encounter ethical tension and criticism even when they give careful attention to ethical aspects of study design.

Older Workers, Cognitive Impairment, and Discrimination.

An aging workforce is forcing employers to deal with the challenge of workers who may develop cognitive impairments. Federal law prohibits workplace discrimination based on age and disability and sets limits on permissible policies. Mandatory retirement, with only a few exceptions, has been eliminated, and age-related screening likely violates antidiscrimination statutes. Employers are permitted to target assessments at workers who show signs of impairment. Applying that rule in a fashion that is fair to employees, and protective of the interests of employers and the public, is the difficult, but vital, task ahead.

Receiving de novo genetic diagnoses for autism with intellectual disability: parents' views of impacts on families' reproductive decisions.

Parents of children with autism who receive genetic diagnoses of de novo variants face challenges in understanding the implications for reproductive decision-making. We interviewed 28 parents who received de novo genetic diagnoses for their child's autism and intellectual disability (ID). These genetic variants proved to have reproductive implications for not only the child's parents, but the child and his/her neurotypical siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins. Parents had often already finished building their families but varied, overall, in whether the results had affected, or might have influenced, their reproductive decisions. Parents' views were shaped by factors related to not only genetics, but also parental age, financial considerations, competing hopes and visions for their family's future, perceived abilities to care for an additional child with similar symptoms, and the extent of the child's symptoms. Members of a couple sometimes disagreed about whether to have more children. Parents pondered, too, the possibility of preimplantation genetic testing, though misunderstandings about it arose. Children with autism vary widely in their abilities to understand the reproductive implications of genetic diagnoses for themselves. Neurotypical offspring were much relieved to understand that their own children would not be affected. While some autism self-advocates have been concerned that genetic testing related to autism could lead to eugenics, the present data, concerning de novo genetic findings, raise other perspectives. These data, the first to explore several key aspects of the reproductive implications of genetic diagnoses for this group, have important implications for future practice, education, and research-e.g., concerning various family members.

Parents' views of benefits and limitations of receiving genetic diagnoses for their offspring.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with autism with intellectual disabilities (ID) are increasingly undergoing genetic testing, posing questions of how parents view/respond to such results. METHODS: Twenty-eight parents whose offspring had received genetic diagnoses of de novo pathogenic variants associated with autism were interviewed. RESULTS: Genetic diagnoses parents receive concerning their offspring's autism/intellectual disabilities can be 'double-edged' in several ways, having advantages, but also certain disadvantages and limitations. Benefits were medical/scientific (e.g., ending diagnostic odysseys and potentially contributing to research), emotional (e.g., relief, peace of mind and less self-blame), cognitive, social (e.g., validation and confirmation with others - it's 'not just in our head') and financial (e.g., estate planning), now and in the future (e.g., preparing for possible future symptoms, development and availability of treatment and setting realistic expectations). Limitations included a lack of medical treatments related to the genetic diagnosis, a sense of finality and heightened uncertainties which can increase anxieties (e.g., concerning additional symptoms associated with genetic diagnoses and offspring's ability to live independently in the future). Overall, parents were glad to receive the results, seeing the pros outweighing the cons. Parents responded to these tensions in various ways, having mixed feelings, recognizing the trade-offs and/or focusing on their offspring's present needs. Factors such as age of offspring at receipt of genetic diagnosis, parent's scientific background and prior views and degrees of self-blame affected these responses. CONCLUSIONS: These data, the first to examine how parents perceive genetic diagnoses received for offspring with autism and ID through whole exome/whole genome sequencing, highlight practical medical and psychological benefits as well as limitations. These findings thus have important implications for future education, engagement of families and research. Providers should be aware of these issues, to inform and assist families, who are considering such testing, about these potential pros and cons and responses.

Impact of Receiving Genetic Diagnoses on Parents' Perceptions of Their Children with Autism and Intellectual Disability.

To assess whether genetic test results identifying the cause of a child's autism, when accompanied by other neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD), including intellectual disability, alter how parents perceive and treat their child. 28 parents of 22 individuals with autism (mean age: 15 years), usually with other NDDs, were interviewed after receiving genetic diagnoses indicating a de novo mutation through the Simons Foundation Powering Autism Research for Knowledge study. Diagnosis of a de novo genetic variant can alter parental perceptions of offspring with autism and other NDDs. Parents often blamed their child less, saw their child as less in control of symptoms, and developed more patience, framing expectations accordingly. Parents had mixed feelings about receiving genetic diagnoses, with sadness sometimes accompanying reframed expectations. Genetic diagnoses could change views of the child among extended family members, teachers, social service agencies, insurers, and broader communities and society. Genetic testing might also reduce delays in diagnoses of autism among African American, Latino and other children. These data, the first to examine several critical aspects of how parents and others view children with autism and other NDDs after receiving genetic diagnoses, highlight vital needs for education of multiple stakeholders (including geneticists, other physicians, genetic counselors, parents, individuals with autism, social service agencies, insurers, policymakers, and the broader public), research (to include perspectives of extended family members, insurers, social service agencies and teachers) and practice (to increase recognition and awareness of the potential benefits and effects of genetic testing for such children).

An Ethical Framework for Research Using Genetic Ancestry.

A wide range of research uses patterns of genetic variation to infer genetic similarity between individuals, typically referred to as genetic ancestry. This research includes inference of human demographic history, understanding the genetic architecture of traits, and predicting disease risk. Researchers are not just structuring an intellectual inquiry when using genetic ancestry, they are also creating analytical frameworks with broader societal ramifications. This essay presents an ethics framework in the spirit of virtue ethics for these researchers: rather than focus on rule following, the framework is designed to build researchers' capacities to react to the ethical dimensions of their work. The authors identify one overarching principle of intellectual freedom and responsibility, noting that freedom in all its guises comes with responsibility, and they identify and define four principles that collectively uphold researchers' intellectual responsibility: truthfulness, justice and fairness, anti-racism, and public beneficence. Researchers should bring their practices into alignment with these principles, and to aid this, the authors name three common ways research practices infringe these principles, suggest a step-by-step process for aligning research choices with the principles, provide rules of thumb for achieving alignment, and give a worked case. The essay concludes by identifying support needed by researchers to act in accord with the proposed framework.

Asymmetric Causal Attributions to Environmental Influences for Prosocial Versus Antisocial Behavior.

Several recent studies have explored how people may favor different explanations for others' behavior depending on the moral or evaluative valence of the behavior in question. This research tested whether people would be less willing to believe that a person's environment played a role in causing her to exhibit antisocial (as compared to prosocial) behavior. In three experiments, participants read a description of a person engaging in either antisocial or prosocial behavior. Participants were less willing to endorse environmental causes of antisocial (versus prosocial) behavior when the environmental influence in question was witnessing others behaving similarly, either during childhood (Experiment 1) or recently (Experiment 2), or being directly encouraged by others to engage in the behavior described (Experiment 3). These results could be relevant to understanding why people resist attributing wrongdoing to causes outside of individual control in some cases.

An Analysis of Motivating Factors in 1,725 Worldwide Cases of Mass Murder Between 1900-2019.

Mass murder, particularly mass shootings, constitutes a major, growing public health concern. Specific motivations for these acts are not well understood, often overattributed to severe mental illness. Identifying diverse factors motivating mass murders may facilitate prevention. We examined 1,725 global mass murders from 1900-2019, publicly described in English in print or online. We empirically categorized each into one of ten categories reflecting reported primary motivating factors, which were analyzed across mass murderers generally, as well as between U.S- and non-U.S.-based mass-shooters. Psychosis or disorganization related to mental illness were infrequently motivational factors (166; 9.6%), and were significantly more associated with mass murder committed using methods other than firearms. The vast majority (998, 57.86%) of incidents were impulsive and emotionally-driven, following adverse life circumstances. Most mass murderers prompted by emotional upset were found to be driven by despair or extreme sadness over life events (161, 16.13% within the category); romantic rejection or loss, or severe jealousy (204, 20.44% within the category); some specific non-romantic grudge (212, 21.24% within the category); or explosive, overwhelming rage following a dispute (266, 26.65% within the category). Results suggest that policies seeking to prevent mass murder should focus on criminal history, as well as subacute emotional disturbances not associated with severe mental illness in individuals with poor coping skills who have recently experienced negative life events.