Psychosis risk screening in clinical high-risk adolescents: A longitudinal investigation using the Child Behavior Checklist
Introduction
In recent years, increased research attention has been focused on the identification and improvement of psychosis risk screening methods in at-risk populations. An extensive body of research provides evidence for social and behavioral precursors of vulnerability to psychosis long before the illness onset (Nuechterlein and Dawson, 1984, Olin and Mednick, 1996, Erlenmeyer-Kimling, 2000, Johnstone et al., 2000, Cornblatt et al., 2002). It is estimated that at least 70% of patients with schizophrenia manifest behavioral problems during adolescence (Cannon et al., 1999, Neumann et al., 1995). Early adulthood is the modal period for the onset of psychosis (Neumann and Walker, 2003). The premorbid indicators of vulnerability include schizotypal symptoms, such as social withdrawal and thought abnormalities (Walker et al., 1999), deficits in memory and executive function (Silverstein et al., 2003), neurological soft signs (Neumann and Walker, 2003), movement abnormalities (Mittal et al., 2007), and other. Also, the majority of individuals who succumb to psychotic disorders manifest prodromal signs of behavioral disturbance (Neumann et al., 1995, Larsen et al., 1996).
The general pattern of findings suggests that pre-psychotic youth are more socially isolated, withdrawn, emotionally labile, anxious, and aggressive than their healthy siblings and/or age-matched comparison subjects. They also have higher levels of impaired attention, which remain stable and elevated from childhood to adolescence, and are assumed to negatively affect social interactions leading to increased stress related to social situations (Cornblatt et al., 1997, Amminger et al., 1999, Hans et al., 2000, Miller et al., 2002a, Ballon et al., 2007). The divergence in developmental trajectories becomes more pronounced with age and is especially apparent in the adolescent period. Research findings also suggest that the behavioral expression of vulnerability to psychosis is characterized by sex differences, with males exhibiting more externalizing behavior problems, while females exhibiting more internalizing behavior problems (Neumann et al., 1995, Walker et al., 1995, Gutt et al., 2008).
Given evidence that early identification and treatment can prevent or delay the transition to psychotic illness (Stafford et al., 2013), efforts to enhance early intervention and prevention methods have become a central focus of attention. Clinician-administered assessments such as the Structured Interview for Prodromal Syndromes (SIPS; Miller et al., 2002b, Miller et al., 2003) and the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS; Yung et al., 2005) have been the standard measures used in specialty research clinics for early detection of patients at risk for psychotic illness. These measures, however, require substantial time for clinician training and patient participation, and are unlikely to be widely adopted in general clinical settings. One feasible strategy to enhance broad-based community screening of individuals at risk for psychosis is to assess the clinical and diagnostic utility of existing and widely used mental health screening tools. For instance, results from a recent study indicate that the Atypicality scale of the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition (BASC-2; Reynolds and Kamphaus, 2004) may be a useful measure for identifying youth in the early stages of psychosis (Thompson et al., 2013). Another study used the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991) to assess its utility to distinguish within a clinical high-risk group of adolescents, individuals who subsequently converted to psychosis compared to those who did not convert (Simeonova et al., 2011). The findings indicate that within a clinical high-risk sample, the CBCL did not show promise as an alternative or adjunctive predictor of conversion to psychosis. No investigations, however, exist on whether the CBCL holds promise for the identification of at-risk youth in the general population. This is a feasible line of investigation, because the CBCL is a parent-report measure with extensive published normative data and its reliability and validity are well established. Although this instrument was not intended to differentiate between individuals at-risk for psychosis and control groups, it has the potential to serve as an inexpensive adjunctive screening measure in clinical practice. Also, the findings of the present study could have important implications for psychosis risk assessments in a variety of youth-oriented settings such as high-school, community centers, pediatric healthcare practice, and other.
The purpose of the present study is to shed light on two research questions: 1) Do CBCL rating scales significantly differentiate between at-risk youth and control groups? 2) At what level of accuracy do selected CBCL rating scales correctly classify individuals based on risk status? It was hypothesized that at-risk youth will be rated by parents as exhibiting more pronounced social and behavioral problems on the CBCL when compared to control groups. It was also predicted that the differences between the groups will become more pronounced over time. The adolescent period is the focus of this study because it is characterized by a rapid increase in risk for psychosis onset, and it is likely to be a critical period for early intervention and prevention (Walker, 2002).
Section snippets
Methods
The study sample of 122 participants, ranging in age from 12 to 18 years, was enrolled in a prospective study at Emory University focused on neurobiological and behavioral aspects of clinical risk for psychosis in adolescents. The three diagnostic groups included 53 adolescents designated as at-risk (AR), 37 adolescents with other personality disorders (OPD), and 32 non-psychiatric controls (NC) (mean age = 14.2; SD = 1.8), who underwent assessments at baseline and at one year follow-up and for whom
Cross-sectional comparisons at baseline
Analyses were first conducted to test for demographic differences among the three diagnostics groups. There were no significant age (F(2,119) = 1.03, p = .358) or sex differences (χ2 = 4.14, p = .349) between the groups.
The CBCL scores and significant group differences for the individual and composite scales are presented in Table 2. Consistent with the prediction, there were significant differences between the groups on the CBCL at baseline assessment. MANCOVA with the CBCL individual scales revealed
Discussion
This is the first study to investigate whether parent-reported social and behavioral problems on the CBCL can be used for psychosis risk screening and the identification of at-risk youth in the general population. The findings indicate that selected rating scales on the CBCL hold promise as possible predictors of risk and that these scales could serve as potential inexpensive adjunctive screening measure in clinical practice. While previous research has not shown evidence for the CBCL as useful
Role of funding source
This research was supported in part by NIMH Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career Development Award 5K23MH096042-03 (Dr. Diana I. Simeonova) and R01 MH4062066 (Dr. Elaine F. Walker). The funding source played no role in data collection, data analysis, or preparation of the manuscript.
Contributors
Each of the contributors has made a substantial contribution to the research and the preparation of the manuscript: Diana I. Simeonova, Dipl.-Psych., Ph.D., Theresa Nguyen, B.A., and Elaine F. Walker, Ph.D.
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank all youth participating in this research study.
References (42)
- et al.
Social functioning in young people at risk for schizophrenia
Psychiatry Res.
(2007) - et al.
The schizophrenia prodrome: treatment and high-risk perspectives
Schizophr. Res.
(2002) - et al.
Social adjustment of adolescents at risk for schizophrenia: the Jerusalem Infant Development Study
J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry
(2000) - et al.
Edinburgh high risk study—findings after four years: demographic, attainment and psychopathological issues
Schizophr. Res.
(2000) - et al.
Psychosis risk screening with the Prodromal Questionnaire–Brief Version (PQ-B)
Schizophr. Res.
(2011) - et al.
Screening for prodromal adolescents in an isolated high-risk population
Schizophr. Res.
(2004) - et al.
Premorbid factors in relation to motor, memory, and executive functions deficits in adult schizophrenia
Schizophr. Res.
(2003) - et al.
Does a parent-report measure of behavioral problems enhance prediction of conversion to psychosis in clinical high-risk adolescents?
Schizophr. Res.
(2011) - et al.
Identifying youth at risk for psychosis using the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition
Schizophr. Res.
(2013) - et al.
Using parent and youth reports from the Behavior Assessment System for Children Second Edition to identify individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis
Schizophr. Res.
(2014)
Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist/4–18 and 1991 profile
Relationship between childhood behavioral disturbance and later schizophrenia in the New York High-Risk Project
Am. J. Psychiatry
The normative development of child and adolescent problem behavior
J. Abnorm. Psychol.
Developmental trajectories of externalizing behaviors in childhood and adolescence
Child Dev.
A prospective cohort study of neurodevelopmental processes in the genesis and epigenesis of schizophrenia
Dev. Psychopathol.
Attention and clinical symptoms in schizophrenia
Psychiatr. Q.
Research in people with psychosis risk syndrome: a review of the current evidence and future directions
J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry
Developmental trajectories of depressive symptoms from early childhood to late adolescence: gender differences and adult outcome
J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry
Childhood antecedents of schizophrenia and affective illness: social adjustment at ages 7 and 11
BMJ
Neurobehavioral deficits in offspring of schizophrenic parents: liability indicators and predictors of illness
Am. J. Med. Genet.
Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-IV Axis I Disorders–Patient Edition (SCID-I/P, Version 2.0)
Biometrics Research Department
Cited by (23)
Preliminary evidence supporting the practice of psychosis-risk screening within an inpatient psychiatric setting serving adolescents
2022, Psychiatry ResearchCitation Excerpt :The Youth Self-Report (YSR) from the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA; Achenbach and Rescorla, 2001) is a similar instrument used in many mental health settings, holding similar potential for identification of attenuated psychosis symptoms. The YSR Thought Problems subscale contains questions that assess symptoms linked to the psychosis spectrum, but this scale has received only limited validation for screening (Simeonova et al., 2014). As the ASEBA system is prominently used across settings serving adolescents, determining whether Thought Problems can be used to effectively screen for psychosis-spectrum conditions in an inpatient setting may be important to increase the uptake of screening among a potentially vulnerable population.
Attachment and thought problems in an adolescent inpatient sample: The mediational role of theory of mind
2017, Comprehensive PsychiatryCitation Excerpt :First, participants experiencing active psychosis were excluded from this study, which raises questions regarding the generalizability of the results to such populations. However, as noted previously, the Thought Problems subscale of the CBCL has demonstrated diagnostic utility in screening for youth at risk of developing psychosis [29]. By utilizing the Thought Problems subscales of the CBCL and YSR, the current study was able to assess emerging psychotic symptoms as a dimensional cross-cutting factor in a sample of adolescents with heterogeneous emotional and behavioral disorders.
Emotional and behavioral symptomatology reported by help-seeking youth at clinical high-risk for psychosis
2015, Schizophrenia ResearchCitation Excerpt :Self-report may be limited due to poor insight, biases that influence responses, and other considerations (e.g., fatigue, mood, stress) that may impact the accuracy of our results. Given evidence from prior research that parent-reported symptomatology may be useful for distinguishing individuals at CHR from other clinical populations (Simeonova et al., 2014), future research may benefit from considering information obtained from parents, clinicians, and teachers (Tsuji et al., 2013). Methodology including multiple informants could provide additional insight into youths' behaviors and symptoms that may impact functioning and inform clinical conceptualization and treatment.