Risk factors for schizophrenia. Follow-up data from the Northern Finland 1966 Birth Cohort Study.

This paper updates single risk factors identified by the Northern Finland 1966 Birth Cohort Study up to the end of year 2001 or age 34. Impaired performance (e.g., delayed motor or intellectual development) or adverse exposures (e.g., pregnancy and birth complications, central nervous system diseases) are associated with an increased risk for schizophrenia. However, upper social class girls and clever schoolboys also have an increased risk to develop schizophrenia, contrasted to their peers. Individuals who subsequently develop schizophrenia follow a developmental trajectory that partly and subtly differs from that of the general population; this trajectory lacks flexibility and responsiveness compared to control subjects, at least in the early stages. We propose a descriptive, lifespan, multilevel systems model on the development and course of schizophrenia.

Predictors of schizophrenia: evidence from the Northern Finland 1966 Birth Cohort and other sources.

BACKGROUND: Subtle motor, emotional, cognitive and behavioural abnormalities are often present in apparently healthy individuals who later develop schizophrenia, suggesting that some aspects of causation are established before overt psychosis. AIMS: To outline the development of schizophrenia. METHOD: We drew on evidence from The Northern Finland 1966 Birth Cohort supplemented by selected findings from other relevant literature. RESULTS: The main known risk factors in development of schizophrenia are genetic causes, pregnancy and delivery complications, slow neuromotor development, and deviant cognitive and academic performance. However, their effect size and predictive power are small. CONCLUSIONS: No powerful risk factor, premorbid sign or risk indicator has been identified that is useful for the prediction of schizophrenia in the general population.

Links between creativity and mental disorder.

A link between mental disorder and decreased ability is commonly assumed, but evidence to the contrary also exists. In reviewing any association between creativity and mental disorder, our aim is not only to update the literature but also to include an epidemiological and theoretical discussion of the topic. For literature retrieval, we used Medline, PsycINFO, and manual literature searches. Studies are numerous: most are empirical, many having methodological difficulties and variations in definitions and concepts. There is little consensus. However, some trends are apparent. We found 13 major case series (over 100 cases), case-control studies, or population-based studies, with valid, reliable measures of mental disorders. The results of all but one of these studies supported the association, at least when concerning particular groups of mental disorders; the findings were somewhat unclear in two studies. Most of the remainder that are not included in our more detailed examination also show a fragile association between creativity and mental disorder, but the link is not apparent for all groups of mental disorders or for all forms of creativity. In conclusion, evidence exists to support some form of association between creativity and mental disorder, but the direction of any causal link remains obscure.

Developmental precursors of psychosis.

Subtle developmental (motor, emotional, cognitive, and behavioral) abnormalities are often present in apparently healthy individuals who later develop psychosis, suggesting that some aspects of causation are established before overt psychosis. These impairments may restrict information processing and social achievements years before manifesting psychosis. The main known risk factors in the development of schizophrenic psychosis are genetic factors, pregnancy and delivery complications, slow neuromotor development, and deviant cognitive and academic performance. However, their effect size and predictive power are small. Developmental precursors are not necessarily specific to schizophrenia, but also common to other psychotic disorders. No powerful risk factor, premorbid sign, or risk indicator has been identified that is useful for prediction of psychoses in the general population.

Low educational performance is associated with drunk driving: a 31-year follow-up of the northern Finland 1966 birth cohort.

AIMS: We studied the relationship between drunk driving offences, school performance and adult educational achievements. METHODS: Data from the Northern Finland 1966 Birth Cohort were linked with official criminality files and National Education registers. The cohort members were studied prospectively covering the period from pregnancy to 31 years of age. Drunk driving (one to two arrests) and recidivist drunk driving (three or more arrests) were treated as outcome variables and their relation to school performance was studied by cross-tabulation and to adult educational achievements (two levels of education) by logistic regression analysis, adjusting for parental social class and psychiatric morbidity. RESULTS: Drunk drivers had a statistically significantly worse school performance compared with controls. Male cohort members who had remained at the basic educational level had an elevated risk for drunk driving [odds ratio (OR) 3.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.3-3.8]. The corresponding adjusted ORs for recidivist drunk driving and female drunk driving were 8.6 (95% CI 5.1-14.4) and 7.0 (95% CI 3.3-14.8), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These results are unlikely to be directly causal; however, educational failures seem to be part of the complex causal pathway to drunk driving and even to alcohol-related disorders.

How should a scientific team be effectively formed and managed.

In the research process, hypotheses, observations and raw data are systematically transformed into new knowledge and scientific rules. People and human input are essential features of the research; the intellectual process performed by the individual scientists and their team. Unplanned administration and human conflicts are the major causes of unsuccessful research. In this article, some essential organizational and psychological aspects of the scientific team are described and discussed. In addition, practical guidelines on forming, working and managing a research team are presented.