s13063-014-0542-8
1745-6215
Study protocol

The FOCUS trial: cognitive remediation plus standard treatment versus standard treatment for patients at ultra-high risk for psychosis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Trials 1745-6215 2015 16 1 25 http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/16/1/25
10.1186/s13063-014-0542-8
3 10 2014
23 12 2014
27 1 2015
2015
Glenthøj et al.; licensee BioMed Central.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Abstract

Background

Cognitive deficits are a distinct feature among people at ultra-high risk (UHR) for psychosis and pose a barrier to functional recovery. Insufficient evidence exists on how to ameliorate these cognitive deficits in patients at UHR for psychosis and hence improve daily living and quality of life. The aim of the trial is to investigate whether cognitive remediation can improve cognitive and psychosocial function in patients at UHR for psychosis.

Methods

The FOCUS trial (Function and Overall Cognition in Ultra-high risk States) is a randomised, parallel group, observer-blinded clinical trial enrolling 126 patients meeting the standardised criteria of being at UHR for psychosis. Patients are recruited from psychiatric in- and outpatient facilities in the Copenhagen catchment area. Patients are randomised to one of the two treatment arms: cognitive remediation plus standard treatment versus standard treatment. The cognitive remediation consists of 24 weekly group-based and manualised sessions targeting neurocognition and social cognition. In addition to the group sessions, the patients will be offered 12 individual sessions aiming at maximising the transfer of the effects of the cognitive training to their everyday lives. Follow-up assessments will be conducted at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome is the composite score on the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia at cessation of treatment after 6 months. Secondary outcomes are social and daily functioning, psychosis-like symptoms, negative symptomatology, and depressive symptomatology as measured with the Personal and Social Performance Scale, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Expanded Version, Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale.

Discussion

This is the first trial to evaluate the effects of neurocognitive and social cognitive remediation in UHR patients. The FOCUS trial results will provide evidence on the effect of targeted and comprehensive cognitive rehabilitation on cognition, daily living, and symptomatology as well as long-term outcome in preventing transition to psychosis in UHR patients.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT 02098408. Date of registration 18 March 2014.

Background

The prodromal phase of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders

Schizophrenia is a debilitating disorder with a point prevalence of 0.6% 1 . The construct of the ultra-high-risk (UHR) state for schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders captures the putative prodromal phase of psychosis, which is seen as a forerunner of frank psychosis. Patients in this UHR state present discrete yet identifiable psychotic symptoms. Intervention studies targeting the UHR state for psychosis have increased during the last decade 2 . Potentially, such interventions could avoid, ameliorate, or delay progression to psychosis. Furthermore, initiating appropriate treatment as early as possible has the potential to improve both the clinical and functional outcomes of patients.

The most recent meta-analysis on prodromal intervention in psychosis assessed 10 randomised clinical trials aiming at preventing psychosis 3 . The intervention strategies in these trials encompass antipsychotic medication, omega-3 fatty acids, psychosocial, and cognitive behavioural interventions and integrative therapy 4 - 13 . The results from these trials are promising, but evidence is still too scarce to be conclusive. None of the studies on prodromal intervention have explored the potential effects of extensive cognitive remediation on improving cognitive and psychosocial functioning in prodromal patients or the potential to prevent transition to psychosis.

Cognitive dysfunctions and cognitive remediation in schizophrenia

It is well known that impairments in cognition are characteristic and pervasive in schizophrenia and significantly influence the functional outcome 14 - 16 . The cognitive and the associated functional impairments cause patients with schizophrenia to experience disturbances in areas such as independent living, social relationships, and educational attainment 15 , 17 and are a strong predictor of response to psychiatric rehabilitation 18 .

Cognition encompasses neurocognitive and social cognitive processes, which are regarded as two distinct but interrelated domains 19 . Neurocognition can be defined as “processes of linking and appraising information. It includes abilities like speed of processing, attention, verbal and visual learning and memory, working memory as well as reasoning and problem solving” 20 , whereas social cognition can be defined as “the mental operations that underlie social interactions, including perceiving, interpreting, and generating responses to the intentions, dispositions, and behaviours of others” 21 . It is hypothesised that social cognition acts as a mediator between neurocognition and functional outcome. Evidence for this hypothesis has been found in several studies 20 , 22 - 27 . These findings imply that social cognition is proximal to the patients’ everyday functioning. In this context social cognition can be seen as critical for the daily functioning of the patients (e.g., community functioning, interpersonal relationships, and ultimately quality of life) 28 . Building on this rationale we decided to target both neurocognition and social cognition in our trial.

A promising method to alleviate cognitive deficits is using cognitive remediation (CR). It can be defined as “a behavioural training based intervention that aims to improve cognitive processes (attention, memory, executive function, social cognition or metacognition) with the goal of durability and generalization” 29 . In the most recent meta-analysis of CR in schizophrenia, Wykes et al. reviewed 40 trials. The effect of CR on cognition, functioning, and symptoms was assessed post-treatment and at follow-up. They demonstrated a significant positive effect in most cognitive domains [global cognition effect size 0.45 with 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.31-0.59] and on functional outcomes (effect size 0.42 with 95% CI = 0.22-0.62). The effect appears to be durable (effect size 0.43 with 95% CI = 0.18-0.67). It is noted that the impact of CR on functional outcomes was significantly greater in studies also providing psychiatric rehabilitation 29 . This leads to the conclusion that CR seems an important and beneficial target of intervention in people with schizophrenia. Research indicates that CR is also effective in other severe mental illnesses 30 , 31 .

Cognitive dysfunctions and cognitive remediation among people at ultra-high risk for psychosis

A clinical staging model of the cognitive deficits in schizophrenia has been proposed. It suggests that there is a cognitive decline between early stages of the illness, implying that the cognitive deficits become increasingly severe as the illness develops 32 . Most studies favour a neurodevelopmental model suggesting that the cognitive deficits are already established before illness onset and remain mostly stable during the illness 33 , 34 .

There is an increasing body of evidence demonstrating that patients in the UHR state show significant deficits in multiple cognitive domains 35 - 38 . In their meta-analysis on cognitive dysfunctions in the UHR state, Fusar-Poli et al. found cognitive deficits associated with the UHR state in attention, verbal fluency, visual and verbal memory, working memory, and executive functioning 35 . An area of cognition that also has been found to be impaired in the UHR state is social cognition, which appears to be closely related to functional outcome 22 , 39 . Evidence shows that the cognitive deficits in UHR patients have a significant impact on their level of functioning 37 , 40 , an even greater impact than symptom severity 22 , 37 .

Reviewing the literature in the electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Clinical Trials.gov, and WHO Trial Portal) for studies related to the terms “cognitive remediation, prodromal psychosis, or ultra-high risk states” resulted in only two published studies that have examined the effect of CR on UHR patients. Bechdolf et al. offered CR as part of a broader integrated intervention programme 9 . They found a beneficial effect of the integrated intervention, but it was not possible to isolate the effect of the CR. A pilot study by Rauchensteiner et al. compared the effectiveness of CR in 10 UHR patients to that of CR in 16 patients with schizophrenia and found relatively greater improvements in cognitive functioning (improved long-term memory functions as well as attention) in the former group 41 . However, as the authors also state, this finding needs to be replicated in studies using larger sample sizes. Furthermore, the observational design generally hinders fair assessment of the benefits of interventions 42 . Of note, the two studies included short-term remediation programmes (10-12 sessions) without direct assessment of the effect on daily functioning. Accordingly, there is a need for randomised clinical trials that apply more extensive cognitive training on larger UHR samples.

The aim of the FOCUS trial is to investigate to what extent CR may improve cognitive abilities and the associated psychosocial function in patients at UHR for psychosis. Bearing in mind the disabling consequences of cognitive deficits in schizophrenia and psychosis-like states, it seems vital to target these deficits to improve the everyday functioning of the patients. Knowing that the cognitive deficits manifest themselves in the UHR state, we expect that cognitive deficits may be even more amenable to treatment at this early stage of illness than what has previously been found at a more chronic stage 43 , 44 . Accordingly, targeting cognitive dysfunctions in the prodromal phase of psychosis may be the optimal time to intervene.

If a beneficial effect of CR on the cognitive and psychosocial dysfunctions in UHR patients is found, this would point to future randomised clinical trials and later potential implementation of CR in facilities offering early intervention in psychosis in order to enhance the ability of patients to function in their daily life.

Hypotheses

In the present study we will examine whether:

1. Cognitive remediation therapy will be superior to standard treatment in improving cognitive functioning in UHR patients (null hypothesis: no difference between the two intervention groups).

2. Cognitive remediation therapy will be superior to standard treatment in improving psychosocial functioning and clinical symptoms in UHR patients (null hypothesis: no difference between the two intervention groups).

Methods

Recruitment

The FOCUS trial is a randomised, blinded, parallel-group superiority clinical trial, enrolling a total of 126 help-seeking patients from in- and outpatient facilities in the catchment area of Copenhagen (Figure 

1
). Patients meeting standardised ‘at-risk’ criteria based on the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS) 45 will be approached about participating in this clinical trial. Patients will be randomised (1:1) to intensive CR plus standard treatment versus standard treatment, as described in further detail in the section Interventions.

Figure 1

Flowchart of the FOCUS trial.

Flowchart of the FOCUS trial.

Inclusion criteria

Participants aged 18-40 years who provide written informed consent and fulfil criteria for being at UHR for psychosis (defined by one or more of the following):

Vulnerability (Trait and State Risk Factor) Group: Individuals with a combination of a trait risk factor (schizotypal personality disorder or a family history of psychotic disorder in a first degree relative) and a significant deterioration in functioning or sustained low functioning during the past year.

Attenuated Psychotic Symptoms (APS) Group: Individuals with sub-threshold (intensity or frequency) positive psychotic symptoms. The symptoms must have been present during the past year.

Brief Limited Intermittent Psychotic Symptoms (BLIPS) Group: Individuals with a recent history of frank psychotic symptoms that resolved spontaneously (without antipsychotic medication) within 1 week. The symptoms must have been present during the past year.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria are: a past history of a treated or untreated psychotic episode of 1 week’s duration or longer, psychiatric symptoms that are explained by a physical illness with psychotropic effect or acute intoxication (e.g., cannabis use), a diagnosis of a serious developmental disorder (e.g., Asperger’s syndrome), currently receiving methylphenidate, or rejects providing informed consent.

An exit criterion is transition to psychosis. Participants who convert to psychosis will be assessed with the 12-month assessment battery.

Interventions

Cognitive remediation (CR) in the experimental group

The CR is conducted in a group setting using both computerised exercises and group exercises. Patients assigned to the experimental intervention group will receive 2 h of CR (1 h of neurocognitive training and 1 h of social cognitive training) once a week for a total of 24 weeks. The training is done in an open group format. In addition to the group training there will be a total of 12 individual sessions of about 50 min aiming at maximising the bridging of the cognitive training to the everyday functioning of the patients, as well as working with individual goals.

The CR is delivered by a cognitive specialist in collaboration with a psychology student with knowledge of cognitive psychology. There will be a maximum of eight participants in each group; thus the therapist-to-patient ratio will be 1:4 or less.

If a patient meets the exit criterion “transition to psychosis”, he or she will be excluded from the intervention but still participate in assessments and statistical analyses, in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle.

The neurocognitive training

The neurocognitive remediation will be done by using the Neuropsychological Educational Approach to Cognitive Remediation (NEAR) 46 , 47 . NEAR is an evidence-based approach that focuses on aspects such as learning and motivation when doing CR. The patients will receive individual neurocognitive training on a computer followed by a group discussion that aims at relating the cognitive exercises to real-world activities. In addition to the group training the patients are instructed to do at least 1 h per week of computerised training at home.

The social cognitive training

The overall aim of the social cognitive training is to enhance the skills that enable the patients to understand the thoughts and intentions of others and to respond adequately in social situations. The social cognitive training will be by use of the Social Cognition and Interaction Training (SCIT) manual developed by Roberts et al. 48 , which takes the form of group psychotherapy and skills training. It addresses several of the key social cognitive domains, comprising intolerance of ambiguity, attributional biases in explaining negative events, theory of mind (ToM), and emotion perception abnormalities . It is the assumption that these social cognitive skills hinder adequate social behaviour in schizophrenia and psychosis-like states.

Individual sessions

The individual sessions serve the purpose of maximising the transfer of the effect of the group training to the daily lives of the patients. The individual sessions are embedded in cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and use core CBT techniques such as goal setting, modifying distorted thinking, problem solving, and role-play. The content of the individual sessions will be tailored to fit the specific problems of the patient. The sessions will follow a manual that frames the sessions. However, it must be taken into account that the sessions cannot be completely manualised as the therapist approach and CBT techniques used will depend on the individual problem.

Fidelity to treatment manual

The intervention is manual-based, which improves standardisation of the treatment. David Roberts, co-author of the SCIT manual 48 , has given a training course at the Mental Health Centre Copenhagen to ensure a proper understanding and use of the SCIT manual as well as adherence to it. The therapists will be offered bi-weekly Skype supervision from Dr Roberts throughout the trial.

A selected number of group sessions will be videotaped and used to rate adherence to the treatment manual by independent raters. The adherence will be rated by use of the SCIT Fidelity Scale (appendix in the SCIT manual) 48 .

Standard intervention in the experimental group

The standard intervention in the experimental group is planned to be similar to the standard intervention in the control group (see description below).

Standard interventions in the control group

Patients allocated to the control group are free to choose whatever standard treatment they are offered by the clinicians managing their treatment. Usually standard treatment consists of a somewhat regular contact to health professionals in the in- and outpatient facilities in the capital region of Denmark (e.g., community psychiatric centres or private specialists in psychiatry). It involves monitoring of psychopharmacological treatment and different kinds of supportive counselling, e.g., concerning their psychiatric symptoms, relating to functional domains, or a more regular psychotherapeutic intervention depending on the nature of the health-service managing their treatment. In contrast to the intervention group, standard treatment does not involve specific cognitive training.

The standard treatment provided to both the experimental and control group will be carefully registered in retrospect at the end of the trial by an independent blinded assessor using a checklist comprising items such as use of medication, psychological interventions, number of sessions, and therapist skills.

Medications

Patients in both treatment groups are allowed to receive medication. In case an antipsychotic-naïve patient develops psychosis during the trial, this will be reported to the health service managing the treatment in order for them to initiate antipsychotic treatment.

Assessments

Assessments will be conducted at baseline, prior to randomisation, as information from the baseline assessment is used to perform stratified randomisation and validate inclusion and exclusion criteria. The assessments will be performed at cessation of treatment 6 months after randomisation and at follow-up 12 months after randomisation.

Diagnosis

The Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS) 45 is used to classify patients as being at UHR for psychosis as well as assessing for transition to psychosis during the trial period. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) 49 , 50 will be used to assess diagnosis.

The CAARMS is a validated instrument showing good to excellent reliability 45 .

Neurocognitive function

Neurocognitive function will be assessed using a comprehensive test battery including the Danish Adult Reading Test (DART), a Danish adaptation of the National Adult Reading Test 51 ; four subtests from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition (WAIS-III) 51 ; Vocabulary, Similarities, Block Design and Matrix Reasoning; the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) battery 52 ; and the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functions-Adult Version (BRIEF-A) 53 . Furthermore, patients will undergo the following computerised tests from the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) 51 : Motor Screening Test, Spatial Span, Spatial Working Memory, Emotion Recognition Task, Stockings of Cambridge, IED Set Shifting Test, Paired Associate Learning, 5-Choice Serial Reaction Time, and Rapid Visual Information Processing.

The BACS is specifically designed to detect cognitive changes in response to treatment. The validity and reliability properties of the BACS have been established in patients with schizophrenia and healthy controls, and the BACS composite score has proven high test-retest reliability, increasing the likelihood of detecting a treatment-related effect 52 , 54 , 55 .

The tests included in the CANTAB battery have proven high validity 56 , 57 . The reliability of the CANTAB tests varies between individual tests. High reliability ( r > 0.8) has been shown on measures of visual processing, e.g., the Paired Associates Learning task, while lower reliability has been found particularly on measures of executive functions, e.g., sub-measures of the IED Set Shifting Task 58 . This lower reliability of tests that assess executive functions is very difficult to avoid because of the necessary task novelty involved in assessing executive processing 58 .

Social cognitive function

Social cognitive function will be measured with The Awareness of Social Inference Test (TASIT) 59 , the High-Risk Social Challenge task (HiSoC) 60 , the Social Cognition Screening Questionnaire (SCSQ) 61 , and Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) 62 .

Symptomatology

General symptomatology, negative, depressive, and manic symptomatology will be measured with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale Expanded Version (BPRS-E) 63 , the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) 64 , 65 , the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) 66 , the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) 67 , and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) 68 . Nine cognitive-perceptive basic symptoms from the Schizophrenia Prediction/Proneness Instrument-Adult Version (SPI-A) 69 will be used as a measure of subjectively experienced cognitive-perceptive symptoms.

Psychosocial function

Three measures will be included to assess psychosocial functioning: the Personal and Social Performance Scale (PSP) 70 , Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS) 71 , and Global Functioning: Social and Role Scales 72 .

Other assessment tools

Five other assessment tools will be used assessing family history, premorbid functioning, substance use, and quality of life. An abbreviated version of the Family Interview for Genetic Studies (FIGS) Family History Index (FHI) (Maxwell M.E: Family interview for genetic studies (FIGS); Manual for FIGS. Unpublished manuscript) is used to assess family history of psychiatric disorder, the Premorbid Adjustment Scale (PAS) 73 assessing premorbid functioning level, Alcohol Smoking & Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) (WHO ASSIST working group 2002 74 ) assessing substance use, and Quality of Life Scale (QOLS) 75 assessing the patients’ perceived quality of life. At cessation of treatment after 6 months the patients’ satisfaction with the received treatment will be evaluated using the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) 76 .

Adverse events

The participants’ well-being will be a primary focus during the trial. Accordingly, their safety will be monitored and accurately reported throughout the treatment period. CR is not known or expected to cause adverse events 77 ; therefore, we do not expect any adverse events to occur. However, should an adverse event occur, it will be dealt with properly by the therapists in charge of the treatment. Using our outcome instruments we will investigate whether the FOCUS intervention causes nominally worse scores, which will be interpreted as a possible indication of harm.

Setting of assessment

All the assessments will take place at the Mental Health Centre Copenhagen. Most tests are assessed using paper and pencil with the exception of CANTAB, which is a computerised test battery, and the HiSoC test, which uses videotaping. The staff members performing the SCID interview are psychologists and medical doctors who have undergone a 4-day training course using the SCID diagnostic interview co-supervised by Dr Joseph Ventura.

Data management

All the data will be stored in locked cabinets at the Mental Health Centre Copenhagen in pseudo-anonymised form (i.e., identifiable only with project codes, which are stored separately from the project key identifying the codes). The data will be completely anonymised after publication of all results. The participants’ privacy will be protected by the Danish Data Protection Agency, which has approved the trial.

Databases will be kept locally at the Mental Health Centre Copenhagen under blinded conditions (see Blinding).

Outcomes and sample size calculation

Primary outcome

The primary outcome is overall cognitive function, measured with the BACS composite score 6 months after randomisation.

Sample size calculation

The sample size calculation is based on our primary outcome, a priori defined to be the between-group difference at 6 months on the BACS composite score. We consider a clinically relevant difference on this scale to correspond to a Cohen’s d of 0.50 (e.g., assuming a between-group difference of 3.0 and a pooled SD of 6.0) 29 . With a two-sided alpha of 0.05 and power of 80%, this will require 63 participants to be randomised to each of the two interventions.

Secondary outcomes and power calculations

The difference in global personal and social functioning 6 months after inclusion will be measured with the PSP. With 63 participants in each group, and assuming a pooled standard deviation of 10 points 72 , 78 - 81 , we will have more than 97% power to detect a difference of 7 points between the groups, which would be considered the minimal clinically relevant difference on this scale 82 .

The BPRS-E will be used to measure symptomatology (e.g., psychosis-like symptoms). The BPRS scale is expected to have a pooled standard deviation of 20.0 points 83 . Given a sample size of 63 per group and a two-sided alpha of 0.05, we have 80% power to detect a difference between the two groups of at least 10.06 points. Antipsychotic treatment and psychotherapeutic interventions have been shown to reduce BPRS by more than 12 points 5 , 84 , indicating that we have sufficient power to detect the minimally relevant difference on this secondary outcome.

Negative symptomatology will be assessed using the SANS. The SANS scale is expected to have a pooled standard deviation of 13 points 5 . Given a sample size of 63 per group and a two-sided alpha of 0.05, we have 80% power to detect a difference between the two groups of at least 6.54 points. Treatments with cognitive and supportive therapy as well as risperidone have been shown to reduce SANS by more than 7 points 5 . This indicates that we have sufficient power to detect the minimally relevant difference of this secondary outcome.

Depressive symptoms will be assessed using the MADRS. Data from a previous randomised clinical trial with UHR patients shows a SD of 9.56 points 6 . Allowing for larger variance in data we set a SD of 10 when calculating detectable differences. With our sample size of 63 per group and a two-sided alpha of 0.05, we have 80% power to detect a difference between the two groups of at least 5.03 points.

Exploratory outcomes

Exploratory outcomes will be transition to psychosis assessed by the CAARMS; symptomatology assessed by the CAARMS and SPI-A; and social cognition assessed by the ERT, TASIT, HiSoC, SCSQ, and SRS. Psychosocial function will be measured with the SOFAS and Global Functioning: Social and Role Scales. Additionally, the BRIEF-A will be used as a proxy measure of daily functioning. Patients perceived quality of life will be assessed with the QOLS, and lastly the number of participants experiencing adverse events will be recorded.

Randomisation

Randomisation will be centralised with a concealed randomisation sequence carried out by the Copenhagen Trial Unit (CTU). Randomisation will be stratified by current use of antipsychotic medication (yes/no) and the IQ score (≤100/>100). Block size will be unknown to the investigators and clinicians.

Signed informed consent will be obtained prior to randomisation. The randomisation is computerised and central. The blinded assessors will enter the participant’s data on a webpage hosted by the CTU. Thereafter, a computerised randomisation is performed, and an email is sent to an independent member at Mental Health Centre Copenhagen revealing to which intervention programme the participant has been allocated. The staff member then contacts the participant and informs him or her of the result of the randomisation. The randomised intervention allocation is concealed until the statistical analyses of resulting data have been completed.

Blinding

The patients and treatment providers will not be blinded. The blinding applies to researchers involved in assessments, data management, data analysis, and drawing outcome conclusions. For the follow-up interviews the patient is instructed in advance not to reveal what type of treatment was received.

Statistical analyses

The planned comparisons between the two groups on continuous outcomes will be carried out with a generalised linear model adjusted for stratification variables, potential baseline imbalances, and skewed attrition, with missing data handled by multiple imputations. As an important secondary assessment of this type of outcome, linear mixed model analyses with repeated measurements and an unstructured covariance matrix will assess the interaction term between time and intervention. For non-normally distributed continuous outcome measures, non-parametric analyses will be applied. For dichotomous outcomes, logistic regression will be applied, and for time to transition, Cox proportional hazards regression will be applied. All analyses will be according to the intention-to-treat principle, analysing all participants in the groups they were assigned to by randomisation. We expect to encounter missing data, and this will be handled with the linear mixed models and multiple imputations as appropriate. A blinded and independent statistician who has no contact to the trial participants will conduct the primary efficacy analyses.

Ethical consideration

The trial has obtained approval by the Regional Ethics Committee of Zealand (H-6-2013-015) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (RHP-2014-009-02670). The trial is registered at ClinicalTrial.gov as NCT 02098408. Positive as well as neutral and negative results of the trial will be published in international journals.

The participants will receive information on the trial both verbally and in written form. Written informed consent will be obtained from each participant before inclusion in the trial. It is emphasised that participation in the trial is voluntary and that the participant can withdraw his or her consent at any time without consequences for treatment possibilities. We will upload depersonalised individual patient data to be used in meta-analyses on Zenodo via OpenAIRE ( https://www.openaire.eu/).

Discussion

There are several strengths in the design of the FOCUS trial. First, to our knowledge no other randomised clinical trial has assessed the effect of both neurocognitive and social cognitive remediation in a UHR population. Second, the CR has a primary focus on linking cognitive remediation to real-life improvements. Third, it is a large-scale trial. As UHR patients are difficult to attain, the sample size of 126 UHR patients makes it one of the biggest UHR intervention trials to date. Fourth, it employs observer-blinded assessment of outcomes with the intention to ensure that the outcome data are assessed without bias 85 . Moreover, data management, data analyses, and conclusions will be conducted and drawn blind to the intervention group. Fifth, assessing outcome at cessation of treatment after 6 months will allow evaluating the immediate effect of the CR, whereas the 12-month follow-up evaluates the long-term effects of the CR intervention. Sixth, the wide range of outcome estimates in the trial allows the opportunity to assess outcome in multiple areas of cognition, symptomatology, and adaptive functioning.

The trial may have some limitations as to the best of our knowledge no published trial has investigated the effect of combining the SCIT treatment with a neurocognitive remediation programme. Hence, we lack knowledge on the feasibility of this approach. However, as stated in the Background section, evidence shows that both the neurocognitive and social cognitive domains are impaired in UHR patients. Therefore, it seems essential to try to target both domains. This is further supported by the hypothesis that social cognition acts as a mediator between neurocognition and real-world outcome. Furthermore, it seems highly effective to combine treatment modalities in CR 29 , 86 . Another limitation is that the experimental intervention is an add-on to standard treatment. This design could potentially cause the problem of patients in the intervention group receiving less standard treatment as a result of participating in the trial.

Trial status

Trial initiation was April 2014. By November 2014, 19 patients had been randomised.

Abbreviations

CR: Cognitive remediation

CTU: Copenhagen trial unit

SCIT: Social cognition and interaction training

RCT: Randomised clinical trial

ToM: Theory of mind

UHR: Ultra-high risk

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

LBG, MN, BF, and LR conceived the trial. LBG and MN wrote the first draft of the protocol. CG participated in the design of the trial, writing the manuscript, and critical revision of the work. CW and KK participated in the design of the trial, writing the manuscript, and critical revision of the work and were involved in the data collection. BF, LR, and AV contributed with expertise in cognitive deficits and cognitive remediation and participated in the design of the trial, writing the manuscript, and critical revision of the work. AM and DR contributed with expertise in cognitive remediation and the design of the intervention, writing the manuscript, and critical revision of the work. CRH contributed with statistical expertise, writing the manuscript, and critical revision of the work. All authors read, improved, and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

Funding for this trial was provided by Mental Health Services of the Capital Region of Denmark, the Research Fund of the Capital Region Denmark, and the Lundbeck Foundation Center for Clinical Intervention and Neuropsychiatric Schizophrenia Research, CINS. The funding sources had no role in the design of this trial and will not have any role during its execution, analyses, interpretation of the data, or decision to submit results.

The authors would like to thank Jens Richardt Møllegaard Jepsen (MSc Psychology, PhD) and Vibeke Fuglsang Bliksted (MSc Psychology, PhD) for their consultative expertise on social cognition during the design phase, Maria Galsgaard (BA Psychology) for her participation in implementing the CR in the trial, Heidi Dorthe Jensen (research nurse), Hanne Junge Larsen (secretary), and Merete Carlsen (laboratory technician) for their help with the practicalities of the trial, and Tina Dam Kristensen (MSc Psychology) for her help with the data collection and input for the trial.

Schizophrenia: a concise overview of incidence, prevalence, and mortality

  • McGrath J
  • Saha S
  • Chant D
  • Welham J
Epidemiol Rev 2008 30 67 76
10.1093/epirev/mxn001 18480098

The psychosis high-risk state: a comprehensive state-of-the-art review

  • Fusar-Poli P
  • Borgwardt S
  • Bechdolf A
  • Addington J
  • Riecher-Rossler A
  • Schultze-Lutter F
JAMA Psychiatry 2013 70 107 20
10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.269 23165428

Preventing a first episode of psychosis: meta-analysis of randomized controlled prevention trials of 12 month and longer-term follow-ups

  • van der Gaag M
  • Smit F
  • Bechdolf A
  • French P
  • Linszen DH
  • Yung AR
Schizophr Res 2013 149 56 62
10.1016/j.schres.2013.07.004 23870806

Randomized controlled trial of interventions designed to reduce the risk of progression to first-episode psychosis in a clinical sample with subthreshold symptoms

  • McGorry PD
  • Yung AR
  • Phillips LJ
  • Yuen HP
  • Francey S
  • Cosgrave EM
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2002 59 921 8
10.1001/archpsyc.59.10.921 12365879

Randomized controlled trial of interventions for young people at ultra-high risk of psychosis: twelve-month outcome

  • McGorry PD
  • Nelson B
  • Phillips LJ
  • Yuen HP
  • Francey SM
  • Thampi A
J Clin Psychiatry 2013 74 349 56
10.4088/JCP.12m07785 23218022

Randomized, double-blind trial of olanzapine versus placebo in patients prodromally symptomatic for psychosis

  • McGlashan TH
  • Zipursky RB
  • Perkins D
  • Addington J
  • Miller T
  • Woods SW
Am J Psychiatry 2006 163 790 9
10.1176/ajp.2006.163.5.790 16648318

Long-chain omega-3 fatty acids for indicated prevention of psychotic disorders: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

  • Amminger GP
  • Schafer MR
  • Papageorgiou K
  • Klier CM
  • Cotton SM
  • Harrigan SM
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2010 67 146 54
10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2009.192 20124114

Transition rates from schizotypal disorder to psychotic disorder for first-contact patients included in the OPUS trial. A randomized clinical trial of integrated treatment and standard treatment

  • Nordentoft M
  • Thorup A
  • Petersen L
  • Ohlenschlaeger J
  • Melau M
  • Christensen TO
Schizophr Res 2006 83 29 40
10.1016/j.schres.2006.01.002 16504481

Preventing progression to first-episode psychosis in early initial prodromal states

  • Bechdolf A
  • Wagner M
  • Ruhrmann S
  • Harrigan S
  • Putzfeld V
  • Pukrop R
Br J Psychiatry 2012 200 22 9
10.1192/bjp.bp.109.066357 22075649

Cognitive therapy for the prevention of psychosis in people at ultra-high risk: randomised controlled trial

  • Morrison AP
  • French P
  • Walford L
  • Lewis SW
  • Kilcommons A
  • Green J
Br J Psychiatry 2004 185 291 7
10.1192/bjp.185.4.291 15458988

Early detection and intervention evaluation for people at risk of psychosis: multisite randomised controlled trial

  • Morrison AP
  • French P
  • Stewart SL
  • Birchwood M
  • Fowler D
  • Gumley AI
BMJ 2012 344 e2233
10.1136/bmj.e2233 22491790

A randomized controlled trial of cognitive behavioral therapy for individuals at clinical high risk of psychosis

  • Addington J
  • Epstein I
  • Liu L
  • French P
  • Boydell KM
  • Zipursky RB
Schizophr Res 2011 125 54 61
10.1016/j.schres.2010.10.015 21074974

Cognitive behavioral therapy for subjects at ultrahigh risk for developing psychosis: a randomized controlled clinical trial

  • van der Gaag M
  • Nieman DH
  • Rietdijk J
  • Dragt S
  • Ising HK
  • Klaassen RM
Schizophr Bull 2012 38 1180 8
10.1093/schbul/sbs105 22941746

Cognitive rehabilitation for schizophrenia: problems, prospects, and strategies

  • Bellack AS
  • Gold JM
  • Buchanan RW
Schizophr Bull 1999 25 257 74
10.1093/oxfordjournals.schbul.a033377 10416730

Neurocognitive deficits and functional outcome in schizophrenia: are we measuring the “right stuff”?

  • Green MF
  • Kern RS
  • Braff DL
  • Mintz J
Schizophr Bull 2000 26 119 36
10.1093/oxfordjournals.schbul.a033430 10755673

Thinking about the future cognitive remediation therapy–what works and could we do better?

  • Wykes T
  • Spaulding WD
Schizophr Bull 2011 37 Suppl 2 S80 90
10.1093/schbul/sbr064 21860051

What are the functional consequences of neurocognitive deficits in schizophrenia?

  • Green MF
Am J Psychiatry 1996 153 321 30
10.1176/ajp.153.3.321 8610818

A meta-analysis of cognitive remediation in schizophrenia

  • McGurk SR
  • Twamley EW
  • Sitzer DI
  • McHugo GJ
  • Mueser KT
Am J Psychiatry 2007 164 1791 802
10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07060906 18056233

The relationship between neurocognition and social cognition with functional outcomes in schizophrenia: a meta-analysis

  • Fett AK
  • Viechtbauer W
  • Dominguez MD
  • Penn DL
  • van Os J
  • Krabbendam L
Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2011 35 573 88
10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.07.001 20620163

Social cognition as a mediator variable between neurocognition and functional outcome in schizophrenia: empirical review and new results by structural equation modeling

  • Schmidt SJ
  • Mueller DR
  • Roder V
Schizophr Bull 2011 37 Suppl 2 S41 54
10.1093/schbul/sbr079 21860046

Social cognition in schizophrenia: an NIMH workshop on definitions, assessment, and research opportunities

  • Green MF
  • Penn DL
  • Bentall R
  • Carpenter WT
  • Gaebel W
  • Gur RC
Schizophr Bull 2008 34 1211 20
10.1093/schbul/sbm145 18184635

Neurocognitive and social cognitive approaches for improving functional outcome in early psychosis: theoretical considerations and current state of evidence

  • Bartholomeusz CF
  • Allott K
Schizophr Res Treat 2012 2012 815315

Facial affect recognition: a mediator between cognitive and social functioning in psychosis?

  • Addington J
  • Saeedi H
  • Addington D
Schizophr Res 2006 85 142 50
10.1016/j.schres.2006.03.028 16678388

Influence of social perception and social knowledge on cognitive and social functioning in early psychosis

  • Addington J
  • Saeedi H
  • Addington D
Br J Psychiatry 2006 189 373 8
10.1192/bjp.bp.105.021022 17012662

Social cognition as a mediator of cognition and outcome among deaf and hearing people with schizophrenia

  • Horton HK
  • Silverstein SM
Schizophr Res 2008 105 125 37
10.1016/j.schres.2008.07.003 18722092

Attentional dysfunction, social perception, and social competence: what is the nature of the relationship?

  • Nienow TM
  • Docherty NM
  • Cohen AS
  • Dinzeo TJ
J Abnorm Psychol 2006 115 408 17
10.1037/0021-843X.115.3.408 16866582

Emotion perception and learning potential: mediators between neurocognition and social problem-solving in schizophrenia?

  • Vaskinn A
  • Sundet K
  • Friis S
  • Simonsen C
  • Birkenaes AB
  • Jonsdottir H
J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2008 14 279 88
10.1017/S1355617708080314 18282325

The functional significance of social cognition in schizophrenia: a review

  • Couture SM
  • Penn DL
  • Roberts DL
Schizophr Bull 2006 32 Suppl 1 S44 63
10.1093/schbul/sbl029 16916889

A meta-analysis of cognitive remediation for schizophrenia: methodology and effect sizes

  • Wykes T
  • Huddy V
  • Cellard C
  • McGurk SR
  • Czobor P
Am J Psychiatry 2011 168 472 85
10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.10060855 21406461

Is cognitive enhancement therapy equally effective for patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder?

  • Lewandowski KE
  • Eack SM
  • Hogarty SS
  • Greenwald DP
  • Keshavan MS
Schizophr Res 2011 125 291 4
10.1016/j.schres.2010.11.017 21167689

RESEARCH: Cognitive rehabilitation for bipolar disorder: An open trial for employed patients with residual depressive symptoms

  • Deckersbach T
  • Nierenberg AA
  • Kessler R
  • Lund HG
  • Ametrano RM
  • Sachs G
CNS Neurosci Ther 2010 16 298 307
10.1111/j.1755-5949.2009.00110.x 19895584

Evolution of neuropsychological dysfunction during the course of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder

  • Lewandowski KE
  • Cohen BM
  • Ongur D
Psychol Med 2011 41 225 41
10.1017/S0033291710001042 20836900

Longitudinal studies of cognition in first episode psychosis: a systematic review of the literature

  • Bozikas VP
  • Andreou C
Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2011 45 93 108
10.3109/00048674.2010.541418 21320033

Meta-analysis of cognitive deficits in ultra-high risk to psychosis and first-episode psychosis: do the cognitive deficits progress over, or after, the onset of psychosis?

  • Bora E
  • Murray RM
Schizophr Bull 2014 40 4 744 55
10.1093/schbul/sbt085 23770934

Cognitive functioning in prodromal psychosis: a meta-analysis

  • Fusar-Poli P
  • Deste G
  • Smieskova R
  • Barlati S
  • Yung AR
  • Howes O
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2012 69 562 71
22664547

Neuropsychological status of subjects at high risk for a first episode of psychosis

  • Hawkins KA
  • Addington J
  • Keefe RS
  • Christensen B
  • Perkins DO
  • Zipurksy R
Schizophr Res 2004 67 115 22
10.1016/j.schres.2003.08.007 14984870

Neurocognitive performance and functional disability in the psychosis prodrome

  • Niendam TA
  • Bearden CE
  • Johnson JK
  • McKinley M
  • Loewy R
  • O’Brien M
Schizophr Res 2006 84 100 11
10.1016/j.schres.2006.02.005 16563699

Generalized and specific cognitive performance in clinical high-risk cohorts: a review highlighting potential vulnerability markers for psychosis

  • Brewer WJ
  • Wood SJ
  • Phillips LJ
  • Francey SM
  • Pantelis C
  • Yung AR
Schizophr Bull 2006 32 538 55
10.1093/schbul/sbj077 16782759

Social cognition deficits and the ‘ultra high risk’ for psychosis population: a review of literature

  • Thompson AD
  • Bartholomeusz C
  • Yung AR
Early Interv Psychiatry 2011 5 192 202
10.1111/j.1751-7893.2011.00275.x 21726422

Neurocognitive predictors of functional outcome two to 13 years after identification as ultra-high risk for psychosis

  • Lin A
  • Wood SJ
  • Nelson B
  • Brewer WJ
  • Spiliotacopoulos D
  • Bruxner A
Schizophr Res 2011 132 1 7
10.1016/j.schres.2011.06.014 21763109

Test-performance after cognitive training in persons at risk mental state of schizophrenia and patients with schizophrenia

  • Rauchensteiner S
  • Kawohl W
  • Ozgurdal S
  • Littmann E
  • Gudlowski Y
  • Witthaus H
Psychiatry Res 2011 185 334 9
10.1016/j.psychres.2009.09.003 20493540

The necessity of randomized clinical trials

  • Jakobsen J
  • Gluud C
Br J Med Clin Res 2013 3 3 1453 68

What is the evidence for changes in cognition and functioning over the lifespan in patients with schizophrenia?

  • Harvey PD
J Clin Psychiatry 2014 75 Suppl 2 34 8
10.4088/JCP.13065su1.08 24919170

Early detection and intervention with schizophrenia: rationale

  • McGlashan TH
  • Johannessen JO
Schizophr Bull 1996 22 201 22
10.1093/schbul/22.2.201 8782282

Mapping the onset of psychosis: the comprehensive assessment of at-risk mental states

  • Yung AR
  • Yuen HP
  • McGorry PD
  • Phillips LJ
  • Kelly D
  • Dell’Olio M
Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2005 39 964 71
10.1080/j.1440-1614.2005.01714.x 16343296
  • Medalia A
  • Revheim N
  • Herlands T
Cognitive remediation for psychological disorders: therapist guide
Oxford University Press, New York: Oxford
2009

The neuropsychological education approach to cognitive remediation (NEAR) model: practice principles and outcome studies

  • Medalia A
  • Freilich B
Am J Psychiatr Rehabil 2008 11 2
10.1080/15487760801963660
Roberts DL, Penn DL, Combs DR. Social Cognition and Interaction Training SCIT: Treatment Manual. New York: Oxford University Press; In press

Training and quality assurance with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID-I/P)

  • Ventura J
  • Liberman RP
  • Green MF
  • Shaner A
  • Mintz J
Psychiatry Res 1998 79 163 73
10.1016/S0165-1781(98)00038-9 9705054
  • First MB
  • Gibbon M
  • Spitzer RL
  • Williams JBW
  • Benjamin LS
Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV axis II personality disorders: SCID-II
American Psychiatric Press, Washington, DC
1997
  • Strauss E
  • Sherman EMS
  • Spreen O
  • Spreen O
A Compendium Of Neuropsychological Tests: Administration, Norms, And Commentary
Oxford University Press, New York
3
2006

The brief assessment of cognition in schizophrenia: reliability, sensitivity, and comparison with a standard neurocognitive battery

  • Keefe RS
  • Goldberg TE
  • Harvey PD
  • Gold JM
  • Poe MP
  • Coughenour L
Schizophr Res 2004 68 283 97
10.1016/j.schres.2003.09.011 15099610

Executive function in the real world: BRIEF lessons from Mark Ylvisaker

  • Gioia GA
  • Kenworthy L
  • Isquith PK
J Head Trauma Rehabil 2010 25 433 9
10.1097/HTR.0b013e3181fbc272 21076244

The schizophrenia cognition rating scale: an interview-based assessment and its relationship to cognition, real-world functioning, and functional capacity

  • Keefe RS
  • Poe M
  • Walker TM
  • Kang JW
  • Harvey PD
Am J Psychiatry 2006 163 426 32
10.1176/appi.ajp.163.3.426 16513863

Norms and standardization of the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS)

  • Keefe RS
  • Harvey PD
  • Goldberg TE
  • Gold JM
  • Walker TM
  • Kennel C
Schizophr Res 2008 102 108 15
10.1016/j.schres.2008.03.024 18495435

Computerized assessment of cognition in schizophrenia: promises and pitfalls of CANTAB

  • Levaux MN
  • Potvin S
  • Sepehry AA
  • Sablier J
  • Mendrek A
  • Stip E
Eur Psychiatry 2007 22 104 15
10.1016/j.eurpsy.2006.11.004 17227707

Test/re-test reliability of the CANTAB and ISPOCD neuropsychological batteries: theoretical and practical issues. Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery. International Study of Post-Operative Cognitive Dysfunction

  • Lowe C
  • Rabbitt P
Neuropsychologia 1998 36 915 23
10.1016/S0028-3932(98)00036-0 9740364

Assessing cognitive function in clinical trials of schizophrenia

  • Barnett JH
  • Robbins TW
  • Leeson VC
  • Sahakiana BJ
  • Joyce EM
  • Blackwell AD
Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2010 34 1161 77
10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.01.012 20105440

TASIT: a new clinical tool for assessing social perception after traumatic brain injury

  • McDonald S
  • Flanagan S
  • Rollins J
  • Kinch J
J Head Trauma Rehabil 2003 18 219 38
10.1097/00001199-200305000-00001 12802165

Social skill and social cognition in adolescents at genetic risk for psychosis

  • Gibson CM
  • Penn DL
  • Prinstein MJ
  • Perkins DO
  • Belger A
Schizophr Res 2010 122 179 84
10.1016/j.schres.2010.04.018 20570111

A new instrument for measuring multiple domains of social cognition: Construct validity of the Social Cognition Screening Questionnaire (Japanese version)

  • Kanie A
  • Hagiya K
  • Ashida S
  • Pu S
  • Kaneko K
  • Mogami T
  • Oshima S
  • Motoya M
  • Niwa SI
  • Inagaki A
Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2014 68 9 701 11
10.1111/pcn.12181 24612235

Assessing autistic traits: cross-cultural validation of the social responsiveness scale (SRS)

  • Bolte S
  • Poustka F
  • Constantino JN
Autism Res 2008 1 354 63
10.1002/aur.49 19360690

Symptom dimensions in recent-onset schizophrenia and mania: a principal components analysis of the 24-item Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale

  • Ventura J
  • Nuechterlein KH
  • Subotnik KL
  • Gutkind D
  • Gilbert EA
Psychiatry Res 2000 97 129 35
10.1016/S0165-1781(00)00228-6 11166085
  • Andreasen NC
Scale for the assessment of negative symptoms: SANS
Dept. of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, the University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
1984

Positive and negative symptoms in schizophrenia. A critical reappraisal

  • Andreasen NC
  • Flaum M
  • Swayze VW
    2nd
  • Tyrrell G
  • Arndt S
Arch Gen Psychiatry 1990 47 615 21
10.1001/archpsyc.1990.01810190015002 2360855

A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change

  • Montgomery SA
  • Asberg M
Br J Psychiatry 1979 134 382 9
10.1192/bjp.134.4.382 444788

A rating scale for mania: reliability, validity and sensitivity

  • Young RC
  • Biggs JT
  • Ziegler VE
  • Meyer DA
Br J Psychiatry 1978 133 429 35
10.1192/bjp.133.5.429 728692

ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology - Revised (DHEW Publ No ADM 76-338)

  • Guy W
Rockville, MD, US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, NIMH Psychopharmacology Research Branch, Division of Extramural Research Programs 1976 218 22

Basic symptoms and the prediction of first-episode psychosis

  • Schultze-Lutter F
  • Ruhrmann S
  • Fusar-Poli P
  • Bechdolf A
  • Schimmelmann BG
  • Klosterkotter J
Curr Pharm Des 2012 18 351 7
10.2174/138161212799316064 22239566

Development, reliability and acceptability of a new version of the DSM-IV Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS) to assess routine social functioning

  • Morosini PL
  • Magliano L
  • Brambilla L
  • Ugolini S
  • Pioli R
Acta Psychiatr Scand 2000 101 323 9
10782554

Reliability and Validity of DSM-IV Axis V

  • Hilsenroth MJ
  • Ackerman SJ
  • Blagys MD
  • Baumann BD
  • Baity MR
  • Smith SR
Am J Psychiatr 2000 157 1858 63
10.1176/appi.ajp.157.11.1858 11058486

Preliminary findings for two new measures of social and role functioning in the prodromal phase of schizophrenia

  • Cornblatt BA
  • Auther AM
  • Niendam T
  • Smith CW
  • Zinberg J
  • Bearden CE
Schizophr Bull 2007 33 688 702
10.1093/schbul/sbm029 17440198

Measurement of premorbid adjustment in chronic schizophrenia

  • Cannon-Spoor HE
  • Potkin SG
  • Wyatt RJ
Schizophr Bull 1982 8 470 84
10.1093/schbul/8.3.470 7134891

The Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST): development, reliability and feasibility

  • World Health Organisation ASSIST Working Group

Addiction 2002 97 1183 1194
10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00185.x

The Quality of Life Scale: an instrument for rating the schizophrenic deficit syndrome

  • Heinrichs DW
  • Hanlon TE
  • Carpenter WTJR
Schizophr Bull 1984 10 388 98
10.1093/schbul/10.3.388 6474101

Assessment of client/patient satisfaction: development of a general scale

  • Larsen DL
  • Attkisson CC
  • Hargreaves WA
  • Nguyen TD
Eval Program Plann 1979 2 197 207
10.1016/0149-7189(79)90094-6 10245370

Adverse effects of cognitive behavioral therapy and cognitive remediation in schizophrenia: results of the treatment of negative symptoms study

  • Klingberg S
  • Herrlich J
  • Wiedemann G
  • Wolwer W
  • Meisner C
  • Engel C
J Nerv Ment Dis 2012 200 569 76
10.1097/NMD.0b013e31825bfa1d 22759932

Memory impairments identified in people at ultra-high risk for psychosis who later develop first-episode psychosis

  • Brewer WJ
  • Francey SM
  • Wood SJ
  • Jackson HJ
  • Pantelis C
  • Phillips LJ
Am J Psychiatry 2005 162 71 8
10.1176/appi.ajp.162.1.71 15625204

Neurocognitive functioning before and after the first psychotic episode: does psychosis result in cognitive deterioration?

  • Becker HE
  • Nieman DH
  • Wiltink S
  • Dingemans PM
  • van de Fliert JR
  • Velthorst E
Psychol Med 2010 40 1599 606
10.1017/S0033291710000048 20132582

Neuropsychological profiles in different at-risk states of psychosis: executive control impairment in the early–and additional memory dysfunction in the late–prodromal state

  • Frommann I
  • Pukrop R
  • Brinkmeyer J
  • Bechdolf A
  • Ruhrmann S
  • Berning J
Schizophr Bull 2011 37 861 73
10.1093/schbul/sbp155 20053865

Neurocognitive deficits in the (putative) prodrome and first episode of psychosis

  • Eastvold AD
  • Heaton RK
  • Cadenhead KS
Schizophr Res 2007 93 266 77
10.1016/j.schres.2007.03.013 17467955

Reliability, validity and ability to detect change of the Personal and Social Performance scale in patients with stable schizophrenia

  • Nasrallah H
  • Morosini P
  • Gagnon DD
Psychiatry Res 2008 161 213 24
10.1016/j.psychres.2007.11.012 18848731

An observational study in psychiatric acute patients admitted to General Hospital Psychiatric Wards in Italy

  • Ballerini A
  • Boccalon R
  • Boncompagni G
  • Casacchia M
  • Margari F
  • Minervini L
Ann Gen Psychiatry 2007 6 2
10.1186/1744-859X-6-2 17257438

Clinical relevance of findings in trials of antipsychotics: systematic review

  • Lepping P
  • Sambhi RS
  • Whittington R
  • Lane S
  • Poole R
Br J Psychiatry 2011 198 341 5
10.1192/bjp.bp.109.075366 21525517

Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials

  • Savovic J
  • Jones HE
  • Altman DG
  • Harris RJ
  • Juni P
  • Pildal J
Ann Intern Med 2012 157 429 38
10.7326/0003-4819-157-6-201209180-00537 22945832

Cognitive enhancement therapy for early-course schizophrenia: effects of a two-year randomized controlled trial

  • Eack SM
  • Greenwald DP
  • Hogarty SS
  • Cooley SJ
  • DiBarry AL
  • Montrose DM
Psychiatr Serv 2009 60 1468 76
10.1176/ps.2009.60.11.1468 19880464