| Title |
A comparison of adolescent- and adult-onset first-episode, non-affective psychosis: 2-year follow-up
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00406-012-0308-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Johannes Langeveld, Inge Joa, Svein Friis, Wenche ten Velden Hegelstad, Ingrid Melle, Jan O. Johannessen, Stein Opjordsmoen, Erik Simonsen, Per Vaglum, Bjørn Auestad, Thomas McGlashan, Tor K. Larsen |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to compare 2-year outcome among individuals with early-onset (EO; <18 years) versus adult-onset (AO) first-episode, non-affective psychosis. We compared clinical and treatment characteristics of 43 EO and 189 AO patients 2 years after their inclusion in a clinical epidemiologic population-based cohort study of first-episode psychosis. Outcome variables included symptom severity, remission status, drug abuse, treatment utilization, cognition and social functioning. At baseline, EO patients were more symptomatically compromised. However, these initial baseline differences were no longer significant at the 2-year follow-up. This study challenges the findings of a larger and older literature base consisting primarily of non-comparative studies concluding that teenage onset indicates a poor outcome. Our results indicate that adolescent-onset and adult-onset psychosis have similar prognostic trajectories, although both may predict a qualitatively different course from childhood-onset psychosis. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 33 | 42% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2012.
All research outputs
#5,690,774
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
#281
of 1,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,421
of 162,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 162,783 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.