Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T20:36:29.813Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The relationship of social function to depressive and negative symptoms in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2010

C. M. Corcoran ,
D. Kimhy ,
M. A. Parrilla-Escobar ,
V. L. Cressman ,
A. D. Stanford ,
J. Thompson ,
S. Ben David ,
A. Crumbley ,
S. Schobel  and
H. Moore
...Show all authors
C. M. Corcoran*
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
D. Kimhy
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
M. A. Parrilla-Escobar
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
V. L. Cressman
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
A. D. Stanford
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
J. Thompson
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
S. Ben David
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
A. Crumbley
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
S. Schobel
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
H. Moore
Affiliation:
Centre of Prevention and Evaluation, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
D. Malaspina
Affiliation:
NYU Department of Psychiatry, Institute for Social and Psychiatric Initiatives (InSPIRES), New York, NY, USA
*
*Address for correspondence: C. M. Corcoran, M.D., Center of Prevention and Evaluation (COPE), Department of Psychiatry, NYSPI at Columbia, Unit 55, 1051 Riverside Drive, New York, NY 10032, USA. (Email: Cc788@columbia.edu)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Social dysfunction is a hallmark symptom of schizophrenia which commonly precedes the onset of psychosis. It is unclear if social symptoms in clinical high-risk patients reflect depressive symptoms or are a manifestation of negative symptoms.

Method

We compared social function scores on the Social Adjustment Scale-Self Report between 56 young people (aged 13–27 years) at clinical high risk for psychosis and 22 healthy controls. The cases were also assessed for depressive and ‘prodromal’ symptoms (subthreshold positive, negative, disorganized and general symptoms).

Results

Poor social function was related to both depressive and negative symptoms, as well as to disorganized and general symptoms. The symptoms were highly intercorrelated but linear regression analysis demonstrated that poor social function was primarily explained by negative symptoms within this cohort, particularly in ethnic minority patients.

Conclusions

Although this study demonstrated a relationship between social dysfunction and depressive symptoms in clinical high-risk cases, this association was primarily explained by the relationship of each of these to negative symptoms. In individuals at heightened risk for psychosis, affective changes may be related to a progressive decrease in social interaction and loss of reinforcement of social behaviors. These findings have relevance for potential treatment strategies for social dysfunction in schizophrenia and its risk states and predict that antidepressant drugs, cognitive behavioral therapy and/or social skills training may be effective.

Keywords

Clinical high risknegative symptomspsychosissocial functionultra high risk
Type
Original Articles
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , February 2011 , pp. 251 - 261
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Introduction

For several decades, social dysfunction has been identified as a core feature of schizophrenia (Bellack et al. Reference Bellack, Morrison, Wixted and Mueser1990), and is now one of the criteria for diagnosis (APA, 2000). Social dysfunction is often evident early in the course of the disorder (Meares, Reference Meares1959), first subtly during the pre-morbid period in childhood, expressed as difficulty in establishing relationships (Jones et al. Reference Jones, Rodgers, Murray and Marmot1994), as well as social ‘over-reactivity’ (social anxiety, ‘acting out’) in boys and as ‘under-reactivity’ in girls (Done et al. Reference Done, Crow, Johnstone and Sacker1994). In adolescence, individuals at genetic risk for schizophrenia are more likely to have poor peer engagement and unpopularity with peers (as compared both with healthy controls and with individuals at genetic risk for bipolar disorder) (Dworkin et al. Reference Dworkin, Green, Small, Warner, Cornblatt and Erlenmeyer-Kimling1990; Hans et al. Reference Hans, Auerbach, Asarnow, Styr and Marcus2000), phenomena which cannot be accounted for by co-morbid diagnoses (Hans et al. Reference Hans, Auerbach, Asarnow, Styr and Marcus2000). Retrospective studies of individuals with non-affective psychosis demonstrate that active social withdrawal is a common early behavioral change in the prodromal period, accompanied frequently by dysphoria (Yung & McGorry, Reference Yung and McGorry1996; Häfner & Maurer, Reference Häfner and Maurer2003;Møller & Husby, Reference Møller and Husby2000; Tan & Ang, Reference Tan and Ang2001; Corcoran et al. Reference Corcoran, Gerson, Sills-Shahar, Nickou, McGlashan, Malaspina and Davidson2007). Some studies also show that social dysfunction during the prodromal period of schizophrenia is predictive of poor social outcome 5 years beyond a first episode of psychosis (Häfner et al. Reference Häfner and Maurer2003). Social dysfunction is also pervasive among young people identified as at heightened clinical risk for psychosis more generally (Cornblatt et al. Reference Cornblatt, Auther, Niendam, Smith, Zinberg, Bearden and Cannon2007a), at levels comparable with that seen in individuals with a first episode (Ballon et al. Reference Ballon, Kaur, Marks and Cadenhead2007) or even multiple episodes (Addington et al. Reference Addington, Penn, Woods, Addington and Perkins2008a) of psychosis. Social dysfunction in these clinical high-risk (CHR) patients persists over time (Niendam et al. Reference Niendam, Bearden, Zinberg, Johnson, O'Brien and Cannon2007), and is one factor among others that predicts the later development of overt psychosis (Cannon et al. Reference Cannon, Cadenhead, Cornblatt, Woods, Addington, Walker, Seidman, Perkins, Tsuang, McGlashan and Heinssen2008).

In chronic schizophrenia, negative symptoms have been repeatedly identified as the symptom type most closely associated with social dysfunction (Chaves et al. Reference Chaves, Seeman, Mari and Maluf1993; Blanchard et al. Reference Blanchard, Mueser and Bellack1998; Dickerson et al. Reference Dickerson, Boronow, Ringel and Parente1999; Smith et al. Reference Smith, Hull, Goodman, Hedayat-Harris, Willson, Israel and Munich1999, Reference Smith, Hull, Huppert and Silverstein2002; Hofer et al. Reference Hofer, Rettenbacher, Widschwendter, Kemmler, Hummer and Fleischhacker2006; Wittorf et al. Reference Wittorf, Wiedemann, Buchkremer and Klingberg2008) whereas only a few studies have identified positive symptoms (specifically in females) (Chaves et al. Reference Chaves, Seeman, Mari and Maluf1993; MacEwan & Athawes, Reference MacEwan and Athawes1997), disorganized symptoms (Smith et al. Reference Smith, Hull, Huppert and Silverstein2002), general psychopathology (MacEwan & Athawes, Reference MacEwan and Athawes1997), depression (Smith et al. Reference Smith, Hull, Goodman, Hedayat-Harris, Willson, Israel and Munich1999; Jin et al. Reference Jin, Zisook, Palmer, Patterson, Heaton and Jeste2001) and anxiety (Lysaker & Salyers, Reference Lysaker and Salyers2007) as associated with social function. Likewise, among individuals with a first episode of psychosis, negative symptoms predict social function both in cross-sectional (Voges & Addington, Reference Voges and Addington2005) and in longitudinal studies (Ho et al. Reference Ho, Nopoulos, Flaum, Arndt and Andreasen1998; Milev et al. Reference Milev, Ho, Arndt and Andreasen2005). However, in a predominantly African-American cohort of patients with a first episode of non-affective psychosis, social impairment was associated with not only negative but also depressive and general symptoms (Goulding et al. Reference Goulding, Franz, Bergner and Compton2010).

Given its persistence and its impact on morbidity, social dysfunction in schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders is important to understand, especially in its early and incipient phases, when the contribution of chronic illness and medication to social dysfunction is minimal. CHR cohorts are enriched with individuals in early stages of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, so their study affords the opportunity to evaluate clinical correlates of social dysfunction, such that effective treatment strategies can be developed. Along these lines, negative symptoms were found to be related to social dysfunction in a heterogeneous sample meeting ‘clinical high risk criteria’; however, some of the subjects were non-help-seeking individuals from the community as old as 54 years (Svirskis et al. Reference Svirskis, Korkeila, Heinimaa, Huttunen, Ilonen, Ristkari, Hietala, Syvälahti, McGlashan, Vahlberg and Salokangas2007). More recently, Ruhrmann et al. (Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008) reported that in a large German cohort of young help-seeking CHR patients, depressive (but not negative) symptoms reliably correlated with impaired quality of life, including subjective satisfaction with social function. Although the measure of social function used by Ruhrmann et al. (Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008) has well-established psychometric properties and has been used in both schizophrenia and major depressive disorder patient cohorts (Pukrop et al. Reference Pukrop, Möller and Steinmeyer2000), it does not quantify specific behavioral domains relevant to current social functioning. Moreover, a recent, perhaps underpowered, study failed to find an association of social dysfunction, as assessed with the Social Functioning Scale, with symptoms (positive, negative, disorganized, general, depressive, anxiety) in CHR patients (Shim et al. Reference Shim, Kang, Chung, Yoo, Shin and Kwon2008). Thus, at present, there is a need for further study of how symptoms experienced by patients at clinical high risk for psychosis may be related to social function.

In the present study we aimed to characterize the relationship(s) between social function, as measured with the more behaviorally based Social Adjustment Scale-Self Report (SAS-SR; Weissman & Bothwell, Reference Weissman and Bothwell1976) and negative and/or depressive symptoms in young CHR patients. We hypothesized that social dysfunction would be evident in CHR patients, in whom it would be associated with depressive, but not negative, symptoms, as was found by Ruhrmann et al. (Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008).

Method

Subjects

CHR patients were help-seeking individuals who met criteria for at least one of three ‘prodromal’ syndromes, as assessed with the Structured Interview for Prodromal Syndromes (SIPS; Miller et al. Reference Miller, McGlashan, Rosen, Cadenhead, Cannon, Ventura, McFarlane, Perkins, Pearlson and Woods2003): (1) attenuated positive symptom syndrome; (2) genetic risk and deterioration syndrome; and/or (3) brief intermittent psychotic syndrome. Attenuated positive symptoms could not have occurred solely in the context of substance abuse or withdrawal (by history). Both patients and healthy controls were between the ages of 12 and 30 years, and English-speaking. Exclusion criteria for all participants included a history of psychosis, serious risk of harm to self or others, major medical or neurological disorders, and mental retardation [intelligence quotient (IQ) <70 with functional impairment]. Specific exclusion criteria for control participants included: (1) a family history of psychosis; (2) a history of adoption; (3) a diagnosis of a DSM-IV cluster A personality disorder; and (4) any Axis I diagnosis in the preceding 2 years (excluding substance use-related diagnoses).

Patients were ascertained generally through referrals from schools and clinicians in the New York metropolitan area, and through the Internet. Recruitment strategies for patients included presentations, mass mailings of brochures, and the creation of a website. Recruitment and ascertainment of healthy controls were focused on the same source population, and also included flyers and postings on craigslist. The clinical data described in this paper were collected as part of a larger longitudinal cohort study of psychosis risk at the Center of Prevention and Evaluation at New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia, which was approved by the Institute's and University's institutional review boards. All participants aged ⩾18 years provided written informed consent for participation. All participants aged <18 years provided written assent; for these younger subjects, written informed consent was provided by a parent.

Measures of symptoms, IQ and social function

Prodromal symptom severity was rated using the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms (SOPS) (Miller et al. Reference Miller, McGlashan, Rosen, Cadenhead, Cannon, Ventura, McFarlane, Perkins, Pearlson and Woods2003), which probes positive, negative, disorganized and general symptoms (with factors for positive, negative and disorganized symptom types; Hawkins et al. Reference Hawkins, McGlashan, Quinlan, Miller, Perkins, Zipursky, Addington and Woods2004). Individual items are rated from 0 (absent) to 6 (suprathreshold), with a prodromal range considered to lie between the scores of 3 and 5. Reliability for the SIPS/SOPS was established with the Recognition and Prevention clinical high-risk research program at Hillside Hospital (intraclass correlations >0.70 for individual scale items and 1.00 for syndrome ratings). This is consistent with excellent to near excellent inter-rater reliability for individual SOPS items (Miller et al. Reference Miller, McGlashan, Rosen, Cadenhead, Cannon, Ventura, McFarlane, Perkins, Pearlson and Woods2003). Depressive symptoms were evaluated using the 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD; Hamilton, Reference Hamilton1960), which has been employed in both adult and adolescent samples. The HAMD was administered by a postdoctoral psychologist trained at the Lieber Center for Schizophrenia Research, who had achieved κ >0.75 for symptom ratings. Information was available for a subgroup of 40 patients and 16 controls on IQ, measured using the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (Wechsler, Reference Wechsler1981) or Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 3rd edition (Wechsler, Reference Wechsler1991), depending on age.

Social function was assessed at study entry using the SAS-SR (Weissman & Bothwell, Reference Weissman and Bothwell1976), which probes performance over the last 2 weeks in six domains of functioning: work (as a paid worker, unpaid homemaker or student), social and leisure activities, relationships with extended family, role as a marital partner, parental role, and role within the family unit. The SAS-SR was read aloud to participants by a research coordinator with a master's level of clinical training, who then verbally indicated their responses. Each of the 54 items was rated along a five-point Likert scale, with higher scores indicating greater impairment. Up to seven mean scores can be generated, including one for each of six possible domains, and one overall mean score. Scores are calculated by dividing summary scores (per domain and overall) by the number of relevant items responded to. Domains were not considered for individuals if not appropriate (e.g. ‘marital’ if unmarried, ‘parental’ if no children, ‘work’ if no work or study endorsed). The SAS-SR (Weissman & Bothwell, Reference Weissman and Bothwell1976) has been used in both community and clinical samples, and yields results similar to those obtained by the interview format of the SAS both in individuals with depression (Weissman et al. Reference Weissman, Prusoff, Thompson, Harding and Myers1978) and those with schizophrenia (McCreadie & Barron, Reference McCreadie and Barron1984). (The comparability of the SAS-SR to the interview format, however, has not been evaluated in adolescent and early adult clinical cohorts.) Although no collateral information was collected from family and clinicians specifically for ratings of social adjustment using the SAS-SR, each patient participant had a comprehensive clinical evaluation based on data from all sources, and it has been observed that patients are generally reliable and consistent in their description of their social and work function. Demographic information was also obtained.

Data analysis

Patients were compared with controls in terms of demographics, IQ, social function and symptom severity. It was hypothesized that patients with comparable demographics to controls would show impaired social function and worse symptoms. Then, within the patient cohort, potential associations of both social function and symptoms with demographic variables and IQ were examined, and partial correlations/regression analyses were considered for any potential confounding demographic variables and to evaluate primary associations of demographic variables with social function. Non-parametric Spearman analyses were used as a conservative assessment of all potential associations. Linear regression analyses were done to examine together demographic and symptom correlates of overall social function and ‘social/leisure’.

We set α at 0.05 for associations of overall social adjustment score with depression (hypothesized) and negative symptom severity. Bonferroni correction (0.05/10 tests=adjusted α of 0.005) was used to reduce type I error for other analyses, specifically (1) overall social adjustment with positive, disorganized and general symptoms, and (2) exploratory analyses of specifically ‘social/leisure’ with symptoms (negative and other), based on previous findings of an association of the SAS-SR ‘social/leisure’ scale with negative symptoms in schizophrenia cohorts (Wittorf et al. Reference Wittorf, Wiedemann, Buchkremer and Klingberg2008), and (3) correlations of social function with depressive and negative symptoms within the Caucasian and ethnic minority subgroups, given disparate findings in cohorts of different ethnic composition (Ruhrmann et al. Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008; Goulding et al. Reference Goulding, Franz, Bergner and Compton2010). In exploratory analyses, social function and symptoms were also examined in respect to depression diagnoses, family history and later transition to psychosis.

Results

There were 56 CHR patients and 22 healthy controls who were ethnically diverse, and comparable in age (mean about 19–21 years), sex (primarily male), IQ [mean 107 (s.d.=11) v. mean 106 (s.d.=19)], employment status (primarily students) and socio-economic status (based on paternal education) (Table 1). Of the patients, 55 met criteria for attenuated positive symptom syndrome (of whom 16 also met genetic risk and deterioration syndrome criteria) and one patient met criteria for brief intermittent psychotic syndrome. As expected, patients had greater symptom severity, with subthreshold psychotic and other ‘prodromal’ symptoms and mild to moderate depression (Table 1). [Mean symptom scores are comparable with those reported for other CHR cohorts, e.g. total positive 12.0 (s.d.=4.1) and negative 12.1 (s.d.=6.8) symptoms (Cannon et al. Reference Cannon, Cadenhead, Cornblatt, Woods, Addington, Walker, Seidman, Perkins, Tsuang, McGlashan and Heinssen2008)]. Patients also had worse social adjustment, specifically in the ‘social/leisure’ domain, though interestingly had comparable work and school function (determined only for those patients who held a job or attended school). As no participants were married or had children, the marital and parental function domains of the SAS-SR were not applied. Of note, social dysfunction scores obtained were comparable with those obtained in a similar CHR cohort using the same instrument (Ballon et al. Reference Ballon, Kaur, Marks and Cadenhead2007). Further, the cohort is similar to other CHR cohorts in North America in terms of age (19 years), high prevalence of the attenuated positive symptom syndrome, mean total positive and negative symptom scores, family history of psychosis (28.6%) and transition rates to psychosis (25%) (Cannon et al. Reference Cannon, Cadenhead, Cornblatt, Woods, Addington, Walker, Seidman, Perkins, Tsuang, McGlashan and Heinssen2008).

Table 1. Group differences in demographics, symptoms and social function (n=78)

s.d., Standard deviation; BA, Bachelor of Arts; HAMD, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; SOPS, Scale of Prodromal Symptoms; SAS-SR, Social Adjustment Scale-Self Report.

a Paternal education was not obtained for all participants.

b Possible ranges of scores are SOPS positive (0–30), SOPS negative (0–36), SOPS disorganized (0–24), SOPS general (0–24), SAS-SR overall and subscales (each 0–5).

* p⩽0.05, ** p⩽0.001.

Social adjustment, both overall and specifically in the ‘social/leisure’ domain, was unrelated to age, sex and IQ, both for the entire sample and in analyses confined to the patient subgroup. All symptom domains were unrelated to age. As for sex, male patients only had significantly more negative symptoms [14.5 (s.d.=6.2) v. 7.9 (s.d.=4.6) for women, p=0.001]. By contrast, patients from ethnic minorities had significantly worse overall [2.7 (s.d.=0.6) v. 2.3 (s.d.=0.6), t 54=3.057, p=0.003] and ‘social/leisure’ [3.1 (s.d.=0.9) v. 2.5 (s.d.=0.8), t 54=2.861, p=0.006] social function, and significantly greater negative [15.8 (s.d.=6.6) v. 10.5 (s.d.=5.3), t 51=3.24, p=0.002] and disorganized [8.4 (s.d.=3.7) v. 5.5 (s.d.=3.4), t 54=2.754, p=0.008] symptoms. As ethnicity was associated with both overall social function and symptom types of interest, it was included in the final regression model.

Correlational analyses demonstrated that overall social function was, as hypothesized, associated with depressive symptoms, as well as with negative, disorganized and general (but not positive) prodromal symptoms, even correcting for multiple comparisons (i.e. α=0.005; see Table 2). The ‘social/leisure’ domain was also associated with depressive, negative and disorganized (but not positive or general) symptoms, again correcting for multiple comparisons (Table 2). Of note, these various symptom domains (except for positive symptoms) were also significantly associated with one another (see Table 2).

Table 2. Spearman intercorrelations for social function and symptoms

SAS-SR, Social Adjustment Scale-Self Report; Dep, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; SOPS, Scale of Prodromal Symptoms; Pos, SOPS positive symptoms; Neg, SOPS negative symptoms; Dis, SOPS disorganized symptoms; Gen, SOPS general symptoms.

* 0.001<p<0.005, ** p⩽0.001.

Linear regression models were constructed for the outcome variables of overall social dysfunction and for specifically the ‘social/leisure’ domain, including in the models both ethnicity and those symptom types which were individually related to social function (depressive, negative, disorganized and general) (Table 3). These regression models demonstrate the association of negative symptoms with overall social function, as well as with the ‘social/leisure’ subdomain, while adjusting for ethnicity and other symptoms. Of note, the ethnic difference in overall social function also persisted with adjustment for symptoms.

Table 3. Linear regression analyses predicting overall and social/leisure function

s.e., Standard error; SAS-SR, Social Adjustment Scale-Self Report; HAMD, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; SOPS, Scale of Prodromal Symptoms.

Exploratory analyses were done to examine correlations within subgroups by race, given ethnic differences in symptoms and social function. Although not surviving Bonferroni correction, for minority patients, social function appeared to be correlated primarily with negative symptoms (Spearman ρ=0.54, p=0.006). By contrast, for Caucasian patients, social function appeared to be correlated with general symptoms (Spearman ρ=0.50, p=0.008).

There were data available for 39 patients as to diagnoses obtained by structured Diagnostic Interview with Genetic Studies (DIGS; Nurnberger et al. Reference Nurnberger, Blehar, Kaufmann, York-Cooler, Simpson, Harkavy-Friedman, Severe, Malaspina and Reich1994) (with data cleaned, consensus diagnoses achieved, and data entered). Of these 39 patients, 20 met criteria for having had a major depressive episode during their lifetime: these patients had similar social function (2.6 v. 2.4, p=0.15) and symptom profiles (data not shown). Chart review of diagnosis based on study entry clinical evaluation done to augment the DIGS yielded 27 (of 56) patients with a history of major depressive disorder: these patients also did not differ in social function (2.4 v. 2.5, p=0.52) and symptom profiles (data not shown). Of the sample, 28.6% had a known first-degree family member with psychosis: they did not differ from the rest of the cohort in terms of social function or symptoms (data not shown).

Of note, this cohort is enriched with individuals in the early stages of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, as 11 of 56 patients (19.6%) developed schizophrenia (three others developed affective psychosis and one a substance-induced psychosis). Those patients who made the transition to psychosis did not differ in baseline social function or by depressive or prodromal symptoms (data not shown). (The length of follow-up varied greatly, however, ranging from 1 month to 3 years).

Discussion

Consistent with previous studies, social function was significantly impaired in this CHR cohort, as compared with healthy controls ascertained from the same source population, and with similar demographic characteristics. In fact, social dysfunction scores obtained were comparable with those obtained in a similar CHR cohort using the same instrument – the SAS-SR: overall scores 2.5 (our study) v. 2.4 and social/leisure scores 2.8 (our study) v. 2.6 (Ballon et al. Reference Ballon, Kaur, Marks and Cadenhead2007).

Further, in this cohort of CHR patients, social dysfunction was associated with depressive symptoms, a finding consistent with the only other published study identifying symptom correlates of social function in a CHR cohort (Ruhrmann et al. Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008). We build on the findings from that study in employing scales specifically designed to evaluate depression (HAMD; Hamilton, Reference Hamilton1960) and social function [SAS-SR (Weissman & Bothwell, Reference Weissman and Bothwell1976) versus a quality of life scale, known as MSQOL, of which social function is only one of seven domains (Pukrop et al. Reference Pukrop, Möller and Steinmeyer2000)]. Our findings complement theirs in that whereas they evaluated ‘subjective’ satisfaction with social function (Ruhrmann et al. Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008), our methods measured the frequency of specific behaviors related to social function. The CHR state for psychosis was identified in the present study using the SIPS/SOPS (Miller et al. Reference Miller, McGlashan, Rosen, Cadenhead, Cannon, Ventura, McFarlane, Perkins, Pearlson and Woods2003) and was operationalized similarly to the late initial prodromal state (‘LIPS’) or ‘Late Prodromal Syndrome’ in the study by Ruhrmann et al. (Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008), further supporting that this replication illustrates a reliable relationship between depressive symptoms and social function in young people at heightened clinical risk for psychosis.

Unlike the Rurhmann et al. (Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008) study, however, the present study revealed an association between negative symptoms and social dysfunction, which could not be accounted for by the association of either with depressive symptoms. This was particularly surprising given that the former study arguably offered better statistical power to detect such an association. However, our current finding of an association of negative symptoms with social dysfunction is consistent with multiple reports of such an association in schizophrenia patients, including in some cohorts of first-episode psychosis patients (Blanchard et al. Reference Blanchard, Mueser and Bellack1998; Chaves et al. Reference Chaves, Seeman, Mari and Maluf1993; Dickerson et al. Reference Dickerson, Boronow, Ringel and Parente1999; Smith et al. Reference Smith, Hull, Goodman, Hedayat-Harris, Willson, Israel and Munich1999, Reference Smith, Hull, Huppert and Silverstein2002; Hofer et al. Reference Hofer, Rettenbacher, Widschwendter, Kemmler, Hummer and Fleischhacker2006; Wittorf et al. Reference Wittorf, Wiedemann, Buchkremer and Klingberg2008; Goulding et al. Reference Goulding, Franz, Bergner and Compton2010).

One potential explanation for the discrepancy between the present study and Ruhrmann et al. (Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008) is differences in the cohorts and their ascertainment. Their German CHR cohort was older (mean age 26 years v. mean age 20 years in our cohort), and more likely to have a ‘regular occupation’ (72% v. 12% with ‘paid employment’ in our cohort) and to be in a ‘steady partnership’ (32% v. 0% in our cohort). Also, it is not clear if the two cohorts are comparable in the proportion of individuals who develop schizophrenia: whereas in the present cohort, the proportion is 19.6%, this statistic was not provided for the Ruhrmann et al. (Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008) cohort. Ethnic differences may account for the disparate findings, as in both the German cohort (Ruhrmann et al. Reference Ruhrmann, Paruch, Bechdolf, Pukrop, Wagner, Berning, Schultze-Lutter, Janssen, Gaebel, Möller, Maier and Klosterkötter2008) and in the current study's Caucasian subgroup, social function was unrelated to negative symptoms, whereas that association existed both in the current study's ethnic minority subgroup and in a predominantly African-African first-episode cohort (Goulding et al. Reference Goulding, Franz, Bergner and Compton2010).

The ability of the current study to detect a significant association between negative symptoms and social dysfunction may, however, be related to differences in the measures used to characterize social function. Subjective satisfaction with social function, as measured using quality-of-life scales, may be related more to affective symptoms, whereas specific social behavior may be also correlated with negative symptoms. This is supported by the existing literature on clinical correlates of social dysfunction in patients with schizophrenia. Those studies which found an association with depressive symptoms in schizophrenia patients used quality-of-life scales to assess social function (Smith et al. Reference Smith, Hull, Goodman, Hedayat-Harris, Willson, Israel and Munich1999; Jin et al. Reference Jin, Zisook, Palmer, Patterson, Heaton and Jeste2001) whereas those documenting an association with negative symptoms used measures that assay social behavior [e.g. Disability Assessment Scale (Chaves et al. Reference Chaves, Seeman, Mari and Maluf1993); Social Functioning Scale (Dickerson et al. Reference Dickerson, Boronow, Ringel and Parente1999; Goulding et al. Reference Goulding, Franz, Bergner and Compton2010), Social Behavior Scale (Smith et al. Reference Smith, Hull, Goodman, Hedayat-Harris, Willson, Israel and Munich1999); Social Adjustment Scale (Blanchard et al. Reference Blanchard, Mueser and Bellack1998; Wittorf et al. Reference Wittorf, Wiedemann, Buchkremer and Klingberg2008)].

As for negative symptoms, both CHR studies had low mean levels of negative symptoms with similar variance: PANSS mean negative symptom score=13.1 (s.d.=4.9) in the Ruhrmann cohort (possible range=7–49) and SOPS mean negative symptom score=12.7 (s.d.=5.7) in the present cohort (possible range=0–36). Therefore, the discrepancy is unlikely to be related to differences in measures used to assess negative symptoms, or in the prevalence of negative symptoms in the two cohorts, especially as the SIPS/SOPS was in part derived from the PANSS (Miller et al. Reference Miller, McGlashan, Rosen, Cadenhead, Cannon, Ventura, McFarlane, Perkins, Pearlson and Woods2003).

In the current study, social impairment was related to multiple symptom domains – depressed, negative, disorganization, general – that were themselves highly correlated with one another. The notable exception was that positive symptoms correlated neither with social function nor with any of the symptom domains related to social function. These findings are consistent with a principal components analysis of the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms, which demonstrated that 11 of 19 SOPS symptoms loaded heavily together on an initial component, ‘including all negative symptoms and a mix of disorganization and general symptoms’ (p. 343; Hawkins et al. Reference Hawkins, McGlashan, Quinlan, Miller, Perkins, Zipursky, Addington and Woods2004). The robust correlations of depressive symptoms with negative and other prodromal symptoms in the current study suggest that these symptoms may be difficult to distinguish while in attenuated form.

Prevalent social impairment and depression have been described for the prodromal period leading to a first episode of psychosis in retrospective studies (Häfner & Maurer, Reference Häfner and Maurer2003;Møller & Husby, Reference Møller and Husby2000; Tan & Ang, Reference Tan and Ang2001; Corcoran et al. Reference Corcoran, Gerson, Sills-Shahar, Nickou, McGlashan, Malaspina and Davidson2007; Myles-Worsley et al. Reference Myles-Worsley, Weaver and Blailes2007), with one study suggesting that depressive symptoms occur before social impairment (Häfner et al. 1999). Likewise, although ascertained on the basis of subthreshold positive symptoms generally, CHR cohorts have prevalent social impairment, and depressive and negative symptoms (Cornblatt et al. Reference Cornblatt, Lencz, Smith, Correll, Auther and Nakayama2003; Corcoran et al. Reference Corcoran, Davidson, Sills-Shahar, Nickou, Malaspina, Miller and McGlashan2003; Yung et al. Reference Yung, Phillips, Yuen and McGorry2004; Lencz et al. Reference Lencz, Smith, Auther, Correll and Cornblatt2004), which together have been hypothesized to constitute a relatively stable core feature of risk for schizophrenia (Cornblatt et al. Reference Cornblatt, Lencz, Smith, Correll, Auther and Nakayama2003). Social impairment was identified in one CHR study as the most common presenting symptom, characterizing 62% of the cohort (Lencz et al. Reference Lencz, Smith, Auther, Correll and Cornblatt2004). Comparably, the rates of depressive disorder reported for other cohorts are as high as that found in the current study (about 50%): 32% (Lencz et al. Reference Lencz, Smith, Auther, Correll and Cornblatt2004), 50% (Meyer et al. Reference Meyer, Bearden, Lux, Gordon, Johnson, O'Brien, Niendam, Lowey, Ventura and Cannon2005) and 59% (Rosen et al. Reference Rosen, Miller, D'Andrea, McGlashan and Woods2006).

Further, both social impairment (Cornblatt et al. 2007 a; Cannon et al. Reference Cannon, Cadenhead, Cornblatt, Woods, Addington, Walker, Seidman, Perkins, Tsuang, McGlashan and Heinssen2008) and depressive symptoms (Yung et al. Reference Yung, Phillips, Yuen and McGorry2004) have been identified variably as predictors of later transition to psychosis in larger CHR cohorts. Given this associated elevated risk for psychosis, and their effect on current morbidity, these clinical features deserve attention as potential targets of treatment. The prevalent social dysfunction in CHR patients has been described as non-responsive to pharmacological treatment (Cornblatt et al. 2007 a) yet improvement has been observed in some patients, suggesting remediation may be possible (Niendam et al. Reference Niendam, Bearden, Zinberg, Johnson, O'Brien and Cannon2007). Antidepressants may have efficacy not only in treating depressive symptoms in CHR patients but also in preventing the onset of psychosis (Cornblatt et al. Reference Cornblatt, Lencz, Smith, Olsen, Auther, Nakayama, Lesser, Tai, Shah, Foley, Kane and Correll2007b). Case reports suggest efficacy for cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in treating negative symptoms in both schizophrenia (Perivoliotis & Cather, Reference Perivoliotis and Cather2009) and its putative clinical risk states (Kimhy & Corcoran, Reference Kimhy and Corcoran2008). A small study suggests that CBT may improve social impairment, as well as general, depressive and prodromal symptoms in CHR patients (Bechdolf et al. Reference Bechdolf, Veith, Schwarzer, Schormann, Stamm, Janssen, Berning, Wagner and Klosterkötter2005). The feasibility of CBT has been established for CHR patients, in whom it may reduce risk for transition to psychosis (Morrison et al. Reference Morrison, French, Walford, Lewis, Kilcommons, Green, Parker and Bentall2004, Reference Morrison, French, Parker, Roberts, Stevens, Bentall and Lewis2007). Overall, although there is some evidence to suggest that depressive and negative symptoms may be amenable to treatment in CHR patients, more research is required, including clinical trials.

Finally, a curious finding in the current study was that patients from ethnic minorities had worse social function, and greater symptom severity. A likely explanation for this is ascertainment bias, as members of ethnic/racial minority groups are less likely to access mental health care services (Anglin et al. Reference Anglin, Alberti, Link and Phelan2008) and have greater concerns about stigma (Cooper-Patrick et al. Reference Cooper-Patrick, Powe, Jenckes, Gonzales, Levine and Ford1997; Wong et al. Reference Wong, Davidson, Anglin, Link, Malaspina, McGlashan and Corcoran2009). However, there may be real ethnic differences, as the associations of social impairment with negative, depressive and general symptoms seen in the present cohort have as mentioned also been documented in a predominantly African-American cohort with first-episode non-affective psychosis (Goulding et al. Reference Goulding, Franz, Bergner and Compton2010). Ethnic differences in symptoms and function among CHR patients merit further study.

Limitations and future directions

There are several limitations to this study. It is a cross-sectional study of a cohort of only 56 CHR patients and 22 controls. Therefore, causation cannot be established and there is increased risk for type II error. The majority of patients were male, thus limiting the characterization of social dysfunction in girls and women at CHR for psychosis. Social function was assessed using a self-report measure and no collateral information was systematically included. No information was available on pre-morbid adjustment, history of social functioning, age of onset of prodromal symptoms, or duration of prodromal symptoms – all of which may be relevant to social function in CHR patients.

Only IQ was measured in this study, and only in a subgroup of the cohort. It will be important in future studies to examine neuropsychological function in greater detail, as social function has been related in schizophrenia to visual attention and psychomotor function (Kurtz et al. Reference Kurtz and Moberg2005) and to verbal learning and working memory (Smith et al. Reference Smith, Hull, Huppert and Silverstein2002). In a CHR cohort, improved social function was associated prospectively with visual memory and processing speed (Niendam et al. Reference Niendam, Bearden, Zinberg, Johnson, O'Brien and Cannon2007).

Another limitation of this study is that there is no measure of social cognition, which is related to social function in schizophrenia (Couture et al. Reference Couture, Penn and Roberts2006) and which is impaired in both schizophrenia (Couture et al. Reference Couture, Penn and Roberts2006) and CHR cohorts (Addington et al. Reference Addington, Penn, Woods, Addington and Perkins2008b; Couture et al. Reference Couture, Penn, Addington, Woods and Perkins2008). It is plausible that the repeated failure to navigate social situations successfully, especially with peers (and its consequent lack of reward), may lead to both affective symptoms and to social anhedonia and withdrawal. Also, there is no measure of social anxiety, which is prevalent in first-episode psychosis patients, in whom it is related to not only social dysfunction but also depression and negative symptoms (Voges & Addington, Reference Voges and Addington2005). Such social anxiety has been associated in individuals with more chronic presentation of schizophrenia with both poor social function (Blanchard et al. Reference Blanchard, Mueser and Bellack1998) and negative symptoms (Penn et al. Reference Penn, Hope, Spaulding and Kucera1994). We now have studies underway to examine in CHR patients the associations of social dysfunction with social anxiety, social anhedonia and impaired social cognition.

Acknowledgements

The present study was supported by the National Institutes of Mental Health K23MH066279 (C. M. C.), National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression (NARSAD, C. M. C.), the Sackler Foundation (C. M. C.), the Florence T. Irving Award (C. M. C.), the Lieber Schizophrenia Research Program (C.M.C.), the Alicia Koplowitz Foundation (M. A. P.-E.) and NIMH K24 MH01699 (D. M.).

Declaration of Interest

None.

References

Addington, J, Penn, D, Woods, SW, Addington, D, Perkins, DO (2008 a). Social functioning in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis. Schizophrenia Research 99, 119–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Addington, J, Penn, D, Woods, SW, Addington, D, Perkins, DO (2008 b). Facial affect recognition in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis. British Journal of Psychiatry 192, 67–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anglin, DM, Alberti, PM, Link, BG, Phelan, JC (2008). Racial differences in beliefs about the effectiveness and necessity of mental health treatment. American Journal of Community Psychology 42, 17–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
APA (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edn, text revision. American Psychological Association: Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Ballon, JS, Kaur, T, Marks, II, Cadenhead, KS (2007). Social functioning in young people at risk for schizophrenia. Psychiatry Research 151, 29–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bechdolf, A, Veith, V, Schwarzer, D, Schormann, M, Stamm, E, Janssen, B, Berning, J, Wagner, M, Klosterkötter, J (2005). Cognitive-behavioral therapy in the pre-psychotic phase: an exploratory study. Psychiatry Research 136, 251–255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bellack, AS, Morrison, RL, Wixted, JT, Mueser, KT (1990). An analysis of social competence in schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychiatry 156, 809–818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blanchard, JJ, Mueser, KT, Bellack, AS (1998). Anhedonia, positive and negative affect, and social functioning in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin 24, 413–424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cannon, TD, Cadenhead, K, Cornblatt, B, Woods, SW, Addington, J, Walker, E, Seidman, LJ, Perkins, D, Tsuang, M, McGlashan, T, Heinssen, R (2008). Prediction of psychosis in youth at high clinical risk: a multisite longitudinal study in North America. Archives of General Psychiatry 65, 28–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chaves, AC, Seeman, MV, Mari, JJ, Maluf, A (1993). Schizophrenia: impact of positive symptoms on gender social role. Schizophrenia Research 11, 41–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper-Patrick, L, Powe, NR, Jenckes, MW, Gonzales, JJ, Levine, DM, Ford, DE (1997). Identification of patient attitudes and preferences regarding treatment of depression. Journal of General Internal Medicine 12, 431–438.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corcoran, C, Davidson, L, Sills-Shahar, R, Nickou, C, Malaspina, D, Miller, T, McGlashan, T (2003). A qualitative research study of the evolution of symptoms in individuals identified as prodromal to psychosis. Psychiatric Quarterly 74, 313–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corcoran, C, Gerson, R, Sills-Shahar, R, Nickou, C, McGlashan, T, Malaspina, D, Davidson, L (2007). Trajectory to a first episode of psychosis: a qualitative research study with families. Early Interventions in Psychiatry 1, 308–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cornblatt, BA, Auther, AM, Niendam, T, Smith, CW, Zinberg, J, Bearden, CE, Cannon, TD (2007 a). Preliminary findings for two new measures of social and role functioning in the prodromal phase of schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin 33, 688–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cornblatt, BA, Lencz, T, Smith, CW, Correll, CU, Auther, AM, Nakayama, E (2003). The schizophrenia prodrome revisited: a neurodevelopmental perspective. Schizophrenia Bulletin 29, 633–651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cornblatt, BA, Lencz, T, Smith, CW, Olsen, R, Auther, AM, Nakayama, E, Lesser, ML, Tai, JY, Shah, MR, Foley, CA, Kane, JM, Correll, CU (2007 b). Can antidepressants be used to treat the schizophrenia prodrome? Results of a prospective, naturalistic treatment study of adolescents. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 68, 546–557.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Couture, SM, Penn, DL, Addington, SW, Woods, SW, Perkins, DO (2008). Assessment of social judgments and complex mental states in the early phases of psychosis. Schizophrenia Research 100, 237–241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Couture, SM, Penn, DL, Roberts, DL (2006). The functional significance of social cognition in schizophrenia: a review. Schizophrenia Bulletin 32, S44–S63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickerson, F, Boronow, JJ, Ringel, N, Parente, F (1999). Social functioning and neurocognitive deficits in outpatients with schizophrenia: a 2-year follow-up. Schizophrenia Research 37, 13–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Done, DJ, Crow, TJ, Johnstone, EC, Sacker, A (1994). Childhood antecedents of schizophrenia and affective illness: social adjustment at ages 7 and 11. British Medical Journal 309, 699–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dworkin, RH, Green, SR, Small, NE, Warner, ML, Cornblatt, BA, Erlenmeyer-Kimling, L (1990). Positive and negative symptoms and social competence in adolescents at risk for schizophrenia and affective disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry 147, 1234–1236.Google ScholarPubMed
Goulding, SM, Franz, L, Bergner, E, Compton, MT (2010). Social functioning in urban, predominantly African American, socially disadvantaged patients with first-episode nonaffective psychosis. Schizophrenia Research. Published online 8 January 2010. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2009.12.018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Häfner, H, Maurer, K (2003). Modeling the early course of schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin 29, 325–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamilton, M (1960). A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 23, 56–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hans, SL, Auerbach, JG, Asarnow, JR, Styr, B, Marcus, J (2000). Social adjustment of adolescents at risk for schizophrenia: The Jerusalem Infant Development Study. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 39, 1406–1414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkins, KA, McGlashan, TH, Quinlan, D, Miller, TJ, Perkins, DO, Zipursky, RB, Addington, J, Woods, SW (2004). Factorial structure of the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms. Schizophrenia Research 68, 339–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ho, BC, Nopoulos, P, Flaum, M, Arndt, S, Andreasen, NC (1998). Two-year outcome in first-episode schizophrenia: predictive value of symptoms for quality of life. American Journal of Psychiatry 155, 1196–1201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofer, A, Rettenbacher, MA, Widschwendter, CG, Kemmler, G, Hummer, M, Fleischhacker, WW (2006). Correlates of subjective and functional outcomes in outpatient clinic attendees with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience 256, 246–255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jin, H, Zisook, S, Palmer, BW, Patterson, TL, Heaton, RK, Jeste, DV (2001). Association of depressive symptoms with worse functioning in schizophrenia: a study in older outpatients. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 62, 797–803.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, P, Rodgers, B, Murray, R, Marmot, M (1994). Child development risk factors for adult schizophrenia in the British 1946 birth cohort. Lancet 344, 1398–1402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kimhy, D, Corcoran, C (2008). Use of palm computer as an adjunct to cognitive-behavioural therapy with an ultra-high-risk patient: a case report. Early Intervention in Psychiatry 2, 234–241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurtz, MM, Moberg, PJ (2005). Symptoms versus neurocognitive test performance as predictors of psychosocial status in schizophrenia: a 1- and 4-year prospective study. Schizophrenia Bulletin 31, 167–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lencz, T, Smith, CW, Auther, A, Correll, CU, Cornblatt, B (2004). Nonspecific and attenuated negative symptoms in patients at clinical high-risk for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research 68, 37–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lysaker, PH, Salyers, MP (2007). Anxiety symptoms in schizophrenia spectrum disorders: associations with social function, positive and negative symptoms, hope and trauma history. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 116, 290–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacEwan, TH, Athawes, RW (1997). The Nithsdale Schizophrenia Surveys. XV. Social adjustment in schizophrenia: associations with gender, symptoms and childhood antecedents. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 95, 254–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCreadie, RG, Barron, ET (1984). The Nithsdale Schizophrenia Survey. IV. Social adjustment by self-report. British Journal of Psychiatry 144, 547–550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meares, A (1959). The diagnosis of prepsychotic schizophrenia. Lancet i, 55–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, SE, Bearden, CE, Lux, SR, Gordon, JL, Johnson, JK, O'Brien, MP, Niendam, TA, Lowey, RL, Ventura, J, Cannon, TD (2005). The psychosis prodrome in adolescent patients viewed through the lens of DSM-IV. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology 15, 434–451.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milev, P, Ho, B-C, Arndt, S, Andreasen, NC (2005). Predictive values of neurocognition and negative symptoms on functional outcome in schizophrenia: a longitudinal first-episode study with 7-year follow-up. American Journal of Psychiatry 162, 495–506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, TJ, McGlashan, TH, Rosen, JL, Cadenhead, K, Cannon, T, Ventura, J, McFarlane, W, Perkins, DO, Pearlson, GD, Woods, SW (2003). Prodromal assessment with the structured interview for prodromal syndromes and the scale of prodromal symptoms: predictive validity, interrater reliability, and training to reliability. Schizophrenia Bulletin 29, 703–715.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Møller, P, Husby, R (2000). The initial prodrome in schizophrenia: searching for naturalistic core dimensions of experience and behavior. Schizophrenia Bulletin 26, 217–232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morrison, AP, French, P, Parker, S, Roberts, M, Stevens, H, Bentall, RP, Lewis, SW (2007). Three-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of cognitive therapy for the prevention of psychosis in people at ultra-high risk. Schizophrenia Bulletin 33, 682–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, AP, French, P, Walford, L, Lewis, SW, Kilcommons, A, Green, J, Parker, S, Bentall, RP (2004). Cognitive therapy for the prevention of psychosis at ultra-high risk: randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 185, 291–297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Myles-Worsley, M, Weaver, S, Blailes, F (2007). Comorbid depressive symptoms in the developmental course of adolescent-onset psychosis. Early Intervention in Psychiatry 1, 1183–1190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niendam, TA, Bearden, CE, Zinberg, J, Johnson, JK, O'Brien, M, Cannon, TD (2007). The course of neurocognition and social functioning in individuals at ultra high risk for psychosis. Schizophrenia Bulletin 33, 772–781.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nurnberger, JI Jr., Blehar, MC, Kaufmann, CA, York-Cooler, C, Simpson, SG, Harkavy-Friedman, J, Severe, JB, Malaspina, D, Reich, T (1994). Diagnostic interview for genetic studies. Rationale, unique features, and training. Archives of General Psychiatry 51, 849–859.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penn, DL, Hope, DA, Spaulding, W, Kucera, J (1994). Social anxiety in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research 11, 277–284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perivoliotis, D, Cather, C (2009). Cognitive behavioral therapy of negative symptoms. Journal of Clinical Psychology 65, 815–830.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pukrop, R, Möller, HJ, Steinmeyer, EM (2000). Quality of life in psychiatry: a systematic contribution to construct validation and the development of the integrative assessment tool ‘modular system for quality of life’. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience 250, 120–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosen, JL, Miller, TJ, D'Andrea, JT, McGlashan, TH, Woods, SW (2006). Comorbid diagnoses in patients meeting criteria for the schizophrenia prodrome. Schizophrenia Research 85, 124–131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruhrmann, S, Paruch, J, Bechdolf, A, Pukrop, R, Wagner, M, Berning, J, Schultze-Lutter, F, Janssen, B, Gaebel, W, Möller, HJ, Maier, W, Klosterkötter, J (2008). Reduced subjective quality of life in persons at risk for psychosis. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 117, 357–368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shim, G, Kang, D-H, Chung, YS, Yoo, SY, Shin, NY, Kwon, JS (2008). Social functioning deficits in young people at risk for schizophrenia. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 42, 678–685.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, TE, Hull, JW, Goodman, M, Hedayat-Harris, A, Willson, DF, Israel, LM, Munich, RL (1999). The relative influences of symptoms, insight, and neurocognition on social adjustment in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 187, 102–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, TE, Hull, JW, Huppert, JD, Silverstein, SM (2002). Recovery from psychosis in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: symptoms and neurocognitive rate-limiters for the development of social behavior skills. Schizophrenia Research 55, 229–237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Svirskis, T, Korkeila, J, Heinimaa, M, Huttunen, J, Ilonen, T, Ristkari, T, Hietala, J, Syvälahti, E, McGlashan, T, Vahlberg, T, Salokangas, RK (2007). Quality of life and functioning ability in subjects vulnerable to psychosis. Comprehensive Psychiatry 48, 155–160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tan, HY, Ang, YG (2001). First-episode psychosis in the military: a comparative study of prodromal symptoms. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 35, 512–519.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Voges, M, Addington, J (2005). The association between social anxiety and social functioning in first episode psychosis. Schizophrenia Research 76, 287–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wechsler, D (1981). Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Revised (WAIS-R). Psychological Corporation: San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D (1991). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 3rd edn. Psychological Corporation: San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
Weissman, MM, Bothwell, S (1976). Assessment of social adjustment by patient self-report. Archives of General Psychiatry 33, 1111–1115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weissman, MM, Prusoff, BA, Thompson, WD, Harding, PS, Myers, JK (1978). Social adjustment by self-report in a community sample and in psychiatric outpatients. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 166, 317–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittorf, A, Wiedemann, G, Buchkremer, G, Klingberg, S (2008). Prediction of community outcome in schizophrenia 1 year after discharge from inpatient treatment. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience 258, 48–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wong, C, Davidson, L, Anglin, D, Link, B, Malaspina, D, McGlashan, T, Corcoran, C (2009). Stigma in families of patients in early stages of psychotic illness. Early Intervention in Psychiatry 3, 108–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yung, AR, McGorry, PD (1996). The initial prodrome in psychosis: descriptive and qualitative aspects. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 30, 587–599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yung, AR, Phillips, LJ, Yuen, HP, McGorry, PD (2004). Risk factors for psychosis in an ultra high-risk group: psychopathology and clinical features. Schizophrenia Research 67, 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Group differences in demographics, symptoms and social function (n=78)

Figure 1

Table 2. Spearman intercorrelations for social function and symptoms

Figure 2

Table 3. Linear regression analyses predicting overall and social/leisure function