Incidence of first-episode psychosis (FEP) varies substantially across geographic regions. Phenotypes of subclinical psychosis (SP), such as psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) and schizotypy, present several similarities with psychosis. We aimed to examine whether SP measures varied across different sites and whether this variation was comparable with FEP incidence within the same areas. We further examined contribution of environmental and genetic factors to SP.

We used data from 1497 controls recruited in 16 different sites across 6 countries. Factor scores for several psychopathological dimensions of schizotypy and PLEs were obtained using multidimensional item response theory models. Variation of these scores was assessed using multi-level regression analysis to estimate individual and between-sites variance adjusting for age, sex, education, migrant, employment and relational status, childhood adversity, and cannabis use. In the final model we added local FEP incidence as a second-level variable. Association with genetic liability was examined separately.

Schizotypy showed a large between-sites variation with up to 15% of variance attributable to site-level characteristics. Adding local FEP incidence to the model considerably reduced the between-sites unexplained schizotypy variance. PLEs did not show as much variation. Overall, SP was associated with younger age, migrant, unmarried, unemployed and less educated individuals, cannabis use, and childhood adversity. Both phenotypes were associated with genetic liability to schizophrenia.

Schizotypy showed substantial between-sites variation, being more represented in areas where FEP incidence is higher. This supports the hypothesis that shared contextual factors shape the between-sites variation of psychosis across the spectrum.

Neuropsychiatric disorders are common in 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome (22q11DS) with about 25% of affected individuals developing schizophrenia spectrum disorders by young adulthood. Longitudinal evaluation of psychosis spectrum features and neurocognition can establish developmental trajectories and impact on functional outcome.

157 youth with 22q11DS were assessed longitudinally for psychopathology focusing on psychosis spectrum symptoms, neurocognitive performance and global functioning. We contrasted the pattern of positive and negative psychosis spectrum symptoms and neurocognitive performance differentiating those with more prominent Psychosis Spectrum symptoms (PS+) to those without prominent psychosis symptoms (PS−).

We identified differences in the trajectories of psychosis symptoms and neurocognitive performance between the groups. The PS+ group showed age associated increase in symptom severity, especially negative symptoms and general nonspecific symptoms. Correspondingly, their level of functioning was worse and deteriorated more steeply than the PS− group. Neurocognitive performance was generally comparable in PS+ and PS− groups and demonstrated a similar age-related trajectory. However, worsening executive functioning distinguished the PS+ group from PS− counterparts. Notably, of the three executive function measures examined, only working memory showed a significant difference between the groups in rate of change. Finally, structural equation modeling showed that neurocognitive decline drove the clinical change.

Youth with 22q11DS and more prominent psychosis features show worsening of symptoms and functional decline driven by neurocognitive decline, most related to executive functions and specifically working memory. The results underscore the importance of working memory in the developmental progression of psychosis.

Assessment of risks of illnesses has been an important part of medicine for decades. We now have hundreds of ‘risk calculators’ for illnesses, including brain disorders, and these calculators are continually improving as more diverse measures are collected on larger samples.

We first replicated an existing psychosis risk calculator and then used our own sample to develop a similar calculator for use in recruiting ‘psychosis risk’ enriched community samples. We assessed 632 participants age 8–21 (52% female; 48% Black) from a community sample with longitudinal data on neurocognitive, clinical, medical, and environmental variables. We used this information to predict psychosis spectrum (PS) status in the future. We selected variables based on lasso, random forest, and statistical inference relief; and predicted future PS using ridge regression, random forest, and support vector machines.

Cross-validated prediction diagnostics were obtained by building and testing models in randomly selected sub-samples of the data, resulting in a distribution of the diagnostics; we report the mean. The strongest predictors of later PS status were the Children's Global Assessment Scale; delusions of predicting the future or having one's thoughts/actions controlled; and the percent married in one's neighborhood. Random forest followed by ridge regression was most accurate, with a cross-validated area under the curve (AUC) of 0.67. Adjustment of the model including only six variables reached an AUC of 0.70.

Results support the potential application of risk calculators for screening and identification of at-risk community youth in prospective investigations of developmental trajectories of the PS.

Current group-average analysis suggests quantitative but not qualitative cognitive differences between schizophrenia (SZ) and bipolar disorder (BD). There is increasing recognition that cognitive within-group heterogeneity exists in both disorders, but it remains unclear as to whether between-group comparisons of performance in cognitive subgroups emerging from within each of these nosological categories uphold group-average findings. We addressed this by identifying cognitive subgroups in large samples of SZ and BD patients independently, and comparing their cognitive profiles. The utility of a cross-diagnostic clustering approach to understanding cognitive heterogeneity in these patients was also explored.

Hierarchical clustering analyses were conducted using cognitive data from 1541 participants (SZ n = 564, BD n = 402, healthy control n = 575).

Three qualitatively and quantitatively similar clusters emerged within each clinical group: a severely impaired cluster, a mild-moderately impaired cluster and a relatively intact cognitive cluster. A cross-diagnostic clustering solution also resulted in three subgroups and was superior in reducing cognitive heterogeneity compared with disorder clustering independently.

Quantitative SZ–BD cognitive differences commonly seen using group averages did not hold when cognitive heterogeneity was factored into our sample. Members of each corresponding subgroup, irrespective of diagnosis, might be manifesting the outcome of differences in shared cognitive risk factors.