Criterion validity of the Psychotic-Like Experiences Questionnaire for Children (PLEQ-C).

Psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) are perceptual and thought disturbances that, although common among children, increase risk for future psychopathology, particularly if persistent. Clinical interviews are too time-consuming and costly to administer at a population level, but the criterion validity of a brief questionnaire for screening community samples of children as young as 9 years for PLEs has not been established. This study aimed to test the criterion (concurrent and predictive) validity of the Psychotic-Like Experiences Questionnaire for Children (PLEQ-C). The PLEQ-C (9-item self- and 10-item parent-report versions) was administered to 139 children aged 9-12 years and their caregivers recruited from Greater London, UK. Children additionally completed a diagnostic interview assessing hallucinations and delusions and three further PLEQ-C assessments at approximately 24-month intervals. Concordance of child- and caregiver-reports of PLEs on questionnaire (PLE-Q) was low. Self-reports of any PLE-Q demonstrated good sensitivity (73.3%), specificity (78.5%), positive and negative predictive values (PPV: 72.1%; NPV: 79.5%) for any PLE determined by interview (PLE-I), whereas caregiver-reports of any PLE-Q performed poorly (sensitivity 51.7%, specificity 78.5%, PPV 64.6%, NPV 68.1%). Multinomial regression analyses indicated that children reporting any PLE-Q at screening were at significantly increased risk of reporting PLEs on multiple assessments during adolescence relative to no PLEs, closely replicating the pattern and magnitude of effects (large-to-very large) obtained for children with any PLE-I. The PLEQ-C offers a valid, brief, feasible, and cost-effective means of community screening to identify children who present with PLEs and could be assessed with clinical interview.

The role of statin therapy in preventing recurrent stroke.

Several interventions may be used to prevent recurrent stroke. The role of statins was recently clarified by a large double-blind trial comparing atorvastatin with placebo. This article outlines the study results and implications for practice.