Metacognition in first-episode psychosis and its association with positive and negative symptom profiles.

There is growing evidence that metacognitive abilities which include the ability to synthesize knowledge regarding mental states in self and others and use this ability to solve problems are impaired in non-affective psychosis and associated with positive and negative symptom severity. We sought to (a) investigate the severity of metacognitive impairments in first-episode psychosis (FEP) compared to non-clinical controls and (b) explore associations with positive and negative symptom profiles. Ninety-seven people with FEP were compared to 101 control persons. Metacognition was assessed with interviews and the Metacognitive assessment scale-abbreviated. Four groups based on positive and negative symptoms were identified by cluster analysis and compared on metacognition, childhood adversities, duration of untreated psychosis and premorbid social and academic adjustment. Those with high levels of negative symptoms had poorer metacognitive abilities. Those with high positive and low negative symptoms did not have poorer metacognitive abilities than those with low positive and negative symptoms. None of the other predictors differed between the groups. The FEP group had poorer metacognitive abilities than the control group. Inclusion of metacognition in psychosis models may improve our understanding of negative symptoms, while previous findings of a relation with positive symptoms may have been confounded. Implications for current interventions are discussed.

Wellbeing and resilience: mechanisms of transmission of health and risk in parents with complex mental health problems and their offspring--The WARM Study.

UNLABELLED: The WARM study is a longitudinal cohort study following infants of mothers with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and control from pregnancy to infant 1 year of age. BACKGROUND: Children of parents diagnosed with complex mental health problems including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and depression, are at increased risk of developing mental health problems compared to the general population. Little is known regarding the early developmental trajectories of infants who are at ultra-high risk and in particular the balance of risk and protective factors expressed in the quality of early caregiver-interaction. METHODS/DESIGN: We are establishing a cohort of pregnant women with a lifetime diagnosis of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder and a non-psychiatric control group. Factors in the parents, the infant and the social environment will be evaluated at 1, 4, 16 and 52 weeks in terms of evolution of very early indicators of developmental risk and resilience focusing on three possible environmental transmission mechanisms: stress, maternal caregiver representation, and caregiver-infant interaction. DISCUSSION: The study will provide data on very early risk developmental status and associated psychosocial risk factors, which will be important for developing targeted preventive interventions for infants of parents with severe mental disorder. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02306551, date of registration November 12, 2014.

Childhood adversity specificity and dose-response effect in non-affective first-episode psychosis.

BACKGROUND: Reviews conclude that childhood and adolescence sexual, physical, emotional abuse and emotional and physical neglect are all risk factors for psychosis. However, studies suggest only some adversities are associated with psychosis. Dose-response effects of several adversities on risk of psychosis have not been consistently found. The current study aimed to explore adversity specificity and dose-response effects of adversities on risk of psychosis. METHOD: Participants were 101 persons with first-episode psychosis (FEP) diagnosed with ICD-10 F20 - F29 (except F21) and 101 non-clinical control persons matched by gender, age and parents' socio-economic status. Assessment included the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire and parts of the Childhood Experience of Care and Abuse Questionnaire. RESULTS: Eighty-nine percent of the FEP group reported one or more adversities compared to 37% of the control group. Childhood and adolescent sexual, physical, emotional abuse, and physical and emotional neglect, separation and institutionalization were about four to 17 times higher for the FEP group (all p<0.01). The risk of psychosis increased two and a half times for each additional adversity. All associations between specific adversities and psychosis decreased when they were adjusted for other adversities. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that there is a large shared effect of adversities on the risk of psychosis. Contrary to the call for further research into specific adversities, we suggest a search for mechanisms in the shared effects of traumatization. Clinical implications are thorough assessment of adversities and their possible effects.