Cargando…

Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States

BACKGROUND: Since its inception, research in the clinical high-risk (CHR) phase of psychosis has included identifying and exploring the impact of relevant socio-demographic factors. Employing a narrative review approach and highlighting work from the United States, sociocultural and contextual facto...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bridgwater, Miranda A., Petti, Emily, Giljen, Maksim, Akouri-Shan, LeeAnn, DeLuca, Joseph S., Rakhshan Rouhakhtar, Pamela, Millar, Caroline, Karcher, Nicole R., Martin, Elizabeth A., DeVylder, Jordan, Anglin, Deidre, Williams, Raquel, Ellman, Lauren M., Mittal, Vijay A., Schiffman, Jason
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10040591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36993932
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1117022
_version_ 1784912508475146240
author Bridgwater, Miranda A.
Petti, Emily
Giljen, Maksim
Akouri-Shan, LeeAnn
DeLuca, Joseph S.
Rakhshan Rouhakhtar, Pamela
Millar, Caroline
Karcher, Nicole R.
Martin, Elizabeth A.
DeVylder, Jordan
Anglin, Deidre
Williams, Raquel
Ellman, Lauren M.
Mittal, Vijay A.
Schiffman, Jason
author_facet Bridgwater, Miranda A.
Petti, Emily
Giljen, Maksim
Akouri-Shan, LeeAnn
DeLuca, Joseph S.
Rakhshan Rouhakhtar, Pamela
Millar, Caroline
Karcher, Nicole R.
Martin, Elizabeth A.
DeVylder, Jordan
Anglin, Deidre
Williams, Raquel
Ellman, Lauren M.
Mittal, Vijay A.
Schiffman, Jason
author_sort Bridgwater, Miranda A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Since its inception, research in the clinical high-risk (CHR) phase of psychosis has included identifying and exploring the impact of relevant socio-demographic factors. Employing a narrative review approach and highlighting work from the United States, sociocultural and contextual factors potentially affecting the screening, assessment, and service utilization of youth at CHR were reviewed from the current literature. RESULTS: Existing literature suggests that contextual factors impact the predictive performance of widely used psychosis-risk screening tools and may introduce systemic bias and challenges to differential diagnosis in clinical assessment. Factors reviewed include racialized identity, discrimination, neighborhood context, trauma, immigration status, gender identity, sexual orientation, and age. Furthermore, racialized identity and traumatic experiences appear related to symptom severity and service utilization among this population. CONCLUSIONS: Collectively, a growing body of research from the United States and beyond suggests that considering context in psychosis-risk assessment can provide a more accurate appraisal of the nature of risk for psychosis, render more accurate results improving the field's prediction of conversion to psychosis, and enhance our understanding of psychosis-risk trajectories. More work is needed in the U.S. and across the globe to uncover how structural racism and systemic biases impact screening, assessment, treatment, and clinical and functional outcomes for those at CHR.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10040591
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100405912023-03-28 Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States Bridgwater, Miranda A. Petti, Emily Giljen, Maksim Akouri-Shan, LeeAnn DeLuca, Joseph S. Rakhshan Rouhakhtar, Pamela Millar, Caroline Karcher, Nicole R. Martin, Elizabeth A. DeVylder, Jordan Anglin, Deidre Williams, Raquel Ellman, Lauren M. Mittal, Vijay A. Schiffman, Jason Front Psychiatry Psychiatry BACKGROUND: Since its inception, research in the clinical high-risk (CHR) phase of psychosis has included identifying and exploring the impact of relevant socio-demographic factors. Employing a narrative review approach and highlighting work from the United States, sociocultural and contextual factors potentially affecting the screening, assessment, and service utilization of youth at CHR were reviewed from the current literature. RESULTS: Existing literature suggests that contextual factors impact the predictive performance of widely used psychosis-risk screening tools and may introduce systemic bias and challenges to differential diagnosis in clinical assessment. Factors reviewed include racialized identity, discrimination, neighborhood context, trauma, immigration status, gender identity, sexual orientation, and age. Furthermore, racialized identity and traumatic experiences appear related to symptom severity and service utilization among this population. CONCLUSIONS: Collectively, a growing body of research from the United States and beyond suggests that considering context in psychosis-risk assessment can provide a more accurate appraisal of the nature of risk for psychosis, render more accurate results improving the field's prediction of conversion to psychosis, and enhance our understanding of psychosis-risk trajectories. More work is needed in the U.S. and across the globe to uncover how structural racism and systemic biases impact screening, assessment, treatment, and clinical and functional outcomes for those at CHR. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC10040591/ /pubmed/36993932 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1117022 Text en Copyright © 2023 Bridgwater, Petti, Giljen, Akouri-Shan, DeLuca, Rakhshan Rouhakhtar, Millar, Karcher, Martin, DeVylder, Anglin, Williams, Ellman, Mittal and Schiffman. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychiatry
Bridgwater, Miranda A.
Petti, Emily
Giljen, Maksim
Akouri-Shan, LeeAnn
DeLuca, Joseph S.
Rakhshan Rouhakhtar, Pamela
Millar, Caroline
Karcher, Nicole R.
Martin, Elizabeth A.
DeVylder, Jordan
Anglin, Deidre
Williams, Raquel
Ellman, Lauren M.
Mittal, Vijay A.
Schiffman, Jason
Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States
title Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States
title_full Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States
title_fullStr Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States
title_full_unstemmed Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States
title_short Review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the United States
title_sort review of factors resulting in systemic biases in the screening, assessment, and treatment of individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis in the united states
topic Psychiatry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10040591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36993932
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1117022
work_keys_str_mv AT bridgwatermirandaa reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT pettiemily reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT giljenmaksim reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT akourishanleeann reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT delucajosephs reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT rakhshanrouhakhtarpamela reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT millarcaroline reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT karchernicoler reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT martinelizabetha reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT devylderjordan reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT anglindeidre reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT williamsraquel reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT ellmanlaurenm reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT mittalvijaya reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates
AT schiffmanjason reviewoffactorsresultinginsystemicbiasesinthescreeningassessmentandtreatmentofindividualsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosisintheunitedstates