2023
The reliability and validity of the revised Green et al. paranoid thoughts scale in individuals at clinical high‐risk for psychosis
Williams T, Walker E, Strauss G, Woods S, Powers A, Corlett P, Schiffman J, Waltz J, Gold J, Silverstein S, Ellman L, Zinbarg R, Mittal V. The reliability and validity of the revised Green et al. paranoid thoughts scale in individuals at clinical high‐risk for psychosis. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 2023, 147: 623-633. PMID: 36905387, PMCID: PMC10463775, DOI: 10.1111/acps.13545.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsCHR individualsClinical controlFull psychosisHealthy controlsGeneral populationPsychosis symptomsCHR participantsPoor social functioningGreen Paranoid Thoughts ScalePsychosisGroup differencesSocial functioningConfirmatory factor analysisParanoid Thoughts ScaleInterview measuresSeverity continuumTwo-factor structureCritical populationSelf-report measuresPresent studyDiscriminant validityPsychometric indicesParanoid thoughtsIndividualsParticipantsComparing a Computerized Digit Symbol Test to a Pen-and-Paper Classic
Pratt D, Luther L, Kinney K, Osborne K, Corlett P, Powers A, Woods S, Gold J, Schiffman J, Ellman L, Strauss G, Walker E, Zinbarg R, Waltz J, Silverstein S, Mittal V. Comparing a Computerized Digit Symbol Test to a Pen-and-Paper Classic. Schizophrenia Bulletin Open 2023, 4: sgad027. PMID: 37868160, PMCID: PMC10590153, DOI: 10.1093/schizbullopen/sgad027.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchClinical high riskCHR individualsFinger-tapping taskMotor ability measuresDigit symbol testCHR stateHealthy controlsHigh riskClinical InterviewPersistent subgroupSymbol testPersistent groupImpairmentPaper versionMotor abilitiesTask performance differencesComputerized versionSimilar degreeEffect sizeMeasures impairmentPsychosisCoding TestRemote assessmentSubgroupsDigit-symbol task
2022
Three prominent self-report risk measures show unique and overlapping utility in characterizing those at clinical high-risk for psychosis
Williams TF, Powers AR, Ellman LM, Corlett PR, Strauss GP, Schiffman J, Waltz JA, Silverstein SM, Woods SW, Walker EF, Gold JM, Mittal VA. Three prominent self-report risk measures show unique and overlapping utility in characterizing those at clinical high-risk for psychosis. Schizophrenia Research 2022, 244: 58-65. PMID: 35597134, PMCID: PMC9829103, DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2022.05.006.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsProdromal Questionnaire-BriefPositive symptomsSelf-report questionnairesSpecific positive symptomsStructured Clinical InterviewClinical high riskCriterion validityHealthy controlsSpecific symptomsHigh riskDiscriminant validityPsychosis symptomsClinical InterviewCHR individualsStrong convergent validitySymptomsPsychosis riskNeuropsychological testsConsistent significant correlationLimited specificitySignificant correlationConvergent validityPsychosisConstruct validityQuestionnaire
2021
Computerized Assessment of Psychosis Risk †
Mittal VA, Ellman LM, Strauss GP, Walker EF, Corlett PR, Schiffman J, Woods SW, Powers AR, Silverstein SM, Waltz JA, Zinbarg R, Chen S, Williams T, Kenney J, Gold JM. Computerized Assessment of Psychosis Risk †. Journal Of Psychiatry And Brain Science 2021, 6: e210011. PMID: 34307899, PMCID: PMC8302046, DOI: 10.20900/jpbs.20210011.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchClinical high riskComputerized assessmentPsychosis riskPsychosis risk calculatorHelp-seeking individualsBehavioral tasksComputational mechanismsNeurobiological systemsCHR participantsCHR groupCHR researchGroup differencesIllness mechanismsClinical InterviewCutting-edge computational methodsOutcomes two yearsHealthy controlsYoung peoplePrevention effortsMinimal trainingPsychosisTrainingRisk individualsLearning methodsIndividuals