Dataset Information

Life events and psychosis: a review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Recent models of psychosis implicate stressful events in its etiology. However, while evidence has accumulated for childhood trauma, the role of adult life events has received less attention. Therefore, a review of the existing literature on the relationship between life events and onset of psychotic disorder/experiences is timely.

Methods

A search was conducted using PsychInfo, Medline, Embase, and Web of Science to identify studies of life events and the onset of psychosis or psychotic experiences within the general population. Given previous methodological concerns, this review included a novel quality assessment tool and focused on findings from the most robust studies. A meta-analysis was performed on a subgroup of 13 studies.

Results

Sixteen studies published between 1968 and 2012 were included. Of these, 14 reported positive associations between exposure to adult life events and subsequent onset of psychotic disorder/experiences. The meta-analysis yielded an overall weighted OR of 3.19 (95% CI 2.15-4.75). However, many studies were limited by small sample sizes and the use of checklist measures of life events, with no consideration of contextual influences on the meaning and interpretation of events.

Conclusions

Few studies have assessed the role of adult life events in the onset of psychosis. There was some evidence that reported exposure to adult life events was associated with increased risk of psychotic disorder and subclinical psychotic experiences. However, the methodological quality of the majority of studies was low, which urges caution in interpreting the results and points toward a need for more methodologically robust studies.

SUBMITTER: Beards S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3686461 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Life events and psychosis: a review and meta-analysis.

Beards Stephanie S Gayer-Anderson Charlotte C Borges Susana S Dewey Michael E ME Fisher Helen L HL Morgan Craig C

Schizophrenia bulletin 20130513 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Recent models of psychosis implicate stressful events in its etiology. However, while evidence has accumulated for childhood trauma, the role of adult life events has received less attention. Therefore, a review of the existing literature on the relationship between life events and onset of psychotic disorder/experiences is timely.<h4>Methods</h4>A search was conducted using PsychInfo, Medline, Embase, and Web of Science to identify studies of life events and the onset of ps ...[more]

PMID: 23671196

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough the association between psychotic illness and cigarette smoking is well known, the reasons are unclear why people with psychosis are more likely to smoke than are the general population. We aimed to test several hypotheses. First, that daily tobacco use is associated with an increased risk of psychotic illness in both case-control and prospective studies. Second, that smoking is associated with an earlier age at onset of psychotic illness. Finally, that an earlier age at initiation of smoking is associated with an increased risk of psychosis. We also aimed to derive an estimate of the prevalence of smoking in patients presenting with their first episode of psychosis.MethodsWe searched Embase, Medline, and PsycINFO and selected observational studies in which rates of smoking were reported in people with psychotic disorders, compared with controls. We calculated the weighted mean difference for age at onset of psychosis and age at initiation of smoking. For categorical outcomes, we calculated odds ratios from cross-sectional studies and risk ratios from prospective studies.FindingsOf 3717 citations retrieved, 61 studies comprising 72 samples met inclusion criteria. The overall sample included 14 555 tobacco users and 273 162 non-users. The prevalence of smoking in patients presenting with their first episode of psychosis was 0·57 (95% CI 0·52-0·62; p<0·0001). In case-control studies, the overall odds ratio for the first episode of psychosis in smokers versus non-smokers was 3·22 (95% CI 1·63-6·33), with some evidence of publication bias (Egger's test p=0·018, Begg's test p=0·007). For prospective studies, we calculated an overall relative risk of new psychotic disorders in daily smokers versus non-smokers of 2·18 (95% CI 1·23-3·85). Daily smokers developed psychotic illness at an earlier age than did non-smokers (weighted mean difference -1·04 years, 95% CI -1·82 to -0·26). Those with psychosis started smoking at a non-significantly earlier age than did healthy controls (-0·44 years, 95% CI -1·21 to 0·34).InterpretationDaily tobacco use is associated with increased risk of psychosis and an earlier age at onset of psychotic illness. The possibility of a causal link between tobacco use and psychosis merits further examination.FundingNIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre.

Project description:ImportanceThis systematic review and meta-analysis is, to date, the first and most comprehensive to focus on the incidence of nonaffective psychoses among refugees.ObjectiveTo assess the relative risk (RR) of incidence of nonaffective psychosis in refugees compared with the RR in the native population and nonrefugee migrants.Data sourcesPubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase databases were searched for studies from January 1, 1977, to March 8, 2018, with no language restrictions (PROSPERO registration No. CRD42018106740).Study selectionStudies conducted in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Canada were selected by multiple independent reviewers. Inclusion criteria were (1) observation of refugee history in participants, (2) assessment of effect size and spread, (3) adjustment for sex, (4) definition of nonaffective psychosis according to standardized operationalized criteria, and (5) comparators were either nonrefugee migrants or the native population. Studies observing ethnic background only, with no explicit definition of refugee status, were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines were followed for extracting data and assessing data quality and validity as well as risk of bias of included studies. A random-effects model was created to pool the effect sizes of included studies.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome, formulated before data collection, was the pooled RR in refugees compared with the nonrefugee population.ResultsOf the 4358 screened articles, 9 studies (0.2%) involving 540 000 refugees in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Canada were included in the analyses. The RR for nonaffective psychoses in refugees was 1.43 (95% CI, 1.00-2.05; I2 = 96.3%) compared with nonrefugee migrants. Analyses that were restricted to studies with low risk of bias had an RR of 1.39 (95% CI, 1.23-1.58; I2 = 0.0%) for refugees compared with nonrefugee migrants, 2.41 (95% CI, 1.51-3.85; I2 = 96.3%) for refugees compared with the native population, and 1.92 (95% CI, 1.02-3.62; I2 = 97.0%) for nonrefugee migrants compared with the native group. Exclusion of studies that defined refugee status not individually but only by country of origin resulted in an RR of 2.24 (95% CI, 1.12-4.49; I2 = 96.8%) for refugees compared with nonrefugee migrants and an RR of 3.26 (95% CI, 1.87-5.70; I2 = 97.6%) for refugees compared with the native group. In general, the RR of nonaffective psychosis was increased in refugees and nonrefugee migrants compared with the native population.Conclusions and relevanceRefugee experience appeared to be an independent risk factor in developing nonaffective psychosis among refugees in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Canada. These findings suggest that applying the conclusions to non-Scandinavian countries should include a consideration of the characteristics of the native society and its specific interaction with the refugee population.

Project description:Biliary and pancreatic diseases are common in the elderly; however, few studies have addressed the occurrence of adverse events in elderly patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Our objective was to determine the incidence rates of specific adverse events in this group and calculate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for selected comparison groups.Bibliographical searches were conducted in Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases. The studies included documented the incidence of adverse events (perforation, pancreatitis, bleeding, cholangitis, cardiopulmonary adverse events, mortality) in patients aged ≥ 65 who underwent ERCP. Pooled incidence rates were calculated for each reported adverse event and IRRs were determined for available comparison groups. A parallel analysis was performed in patients aged ≥ 80 and ≥ 90.Our literature search yielded 7429 articles, of which 69 studies met our inclusion criteria. Pooled incidence rates for adverse events (per 1000 ERCPs) in patients aged ≥ 65 were as follows: perforation 3.8 (95 %CI 1.8 - 7.0), pancreatitis 13.1 (95 %CI 11.0 - 15.5), bleeding 7.7 (95 %CI 5.7 - 10.1), cholangitis 16.1 (95 %CI 11.7 - 21.7), cardiopulmonary events 3.7 (95 %CI 1.5 - 7.6), and death 7.1 (95 %CI 5.2 - 9.4). Patients ≥ 65 had lower rates of pancreatitis (IRR 0.3, 95 %CI 0.3 - 0.4) compared with younger patients. Octogenarians had higher rates of death (IRR 2.4, 95 %CI 1.3 - 4.5) compared with younger patients, whereas nonagenarians had increased rates of bleeding (IRR 2.4, 95 %CI 1.1 - 5.2), cardiopulmonary events (IRR 3.7, 95 %CI 1.0 - 13.9), and death (IRR 3.8, 95 %CI 1.0 - 14.4). Conclusions ERCP appears to be safe in elderly patients, except in the very elderly who are at higher risk of some adverse events. These data on adverse event rates can help to inform clinical decision-making, the consent process, and comparative effectiveness analyses.

Project description:BackgroundMetamizole is used to treat pain in many parts of the world. Information on the safety profile of metamizole is scarce; no conclusive summary of the literature exists.ObjectiveTo determine whether metamizole is clinically safe compared to placebo and other analgesics.MethodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and several clinical trial registries. We screened the reference lists of included trials and previous systematic reviews. We included randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of metamizole, administered to adults in any form and for any indication, to other analgesics or to placebo. Two authors extracted data regarding trial design and size, indications for pain medication, patient characteristics, treatment regimens, and methodological characteristics. Adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and dropouts were assessed. We conducted separate meta-analyses for each metamizole comparator, using standard inverse-variance random effects meta-analysis to pool the estimates across trials, reported as risk ratios (RRs). We calculated the DerSimonian and Laird variance estimate T2 to measure heterogeneity between trials. The pre-specified primary end point was any AE during the trial period.ResultsOf the 696 potentially eligible trials, 79 trials including almost 4000 patients with short-term metamizole use of less than two weeks met our inclusion criteria. Fewer AEs were reported for metamizole compared to opioids, RR = 0.79 (confidence interval 0.79 to 0.96). We found no differences between metamizole and placebo, paracetamol and NSAIDs. Only a few SAEs were reported, with no difference between metamizole and other analgesics. No agranulocytosis or deaths were reported. Our results were limited by the mediocre overall quality of the reports.ConclusionFor short-term use in the hospital setting, metamizole seems to be a safe choice when compared to other widely used analgesics. High-quality, adequately sized trials assessing the intermediate- and long-term safety of metamizole are needed.

Dataset Information

Life events and psychosis: a review and meta-analysis.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Life events and psychosis: a review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets