RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that exposure to peer self-harm induces adolescents' urges to self-harm and that this is influenced by individual suggestibility. METHODS: We recruited 97 UK-based adults aged 18-25 years with a recent history of self-harm, measuring baseline suggestibility (Resistance to Peer Influence; RPI) and perceived ability to control urges to self-harm (using an adapted item from the Self-Efficacy to Resist Suicidal Action scale; SEASA) before and after two self-harm vignettes featuring named peers from the participant's social network (to simulate exposure to peer non-suicidal self-harm) and after a wash-out exposure. We used paired t-tests to compare mean SEASA scores pre- and post-exposure, and linear regression to test for an association between RPI and change in SEASA scores pre- and post-exposure. RESULTS: Perceived ability to control urges to self-harm was significantly reduced following exposure to peer self-harm (t(96) = 4.02, p < 0.001, mean difference = 0.61; 95% CI = 0.31, 0.91), but was not significantly different from baseline after exposure to a wash-out. We found no association between suggestibility and change in urges to self-harm after exposure to peer self-harm. CONCLUSION: Our findings support social influences on self-harm in a sample of young adults, regardless of their individual degree of suggestibility.
RESUMEN
With an unmet clinical need for effective interventions for cognitive and negative symptoms in patients with schizophrenia, measures of functional status (often a co-primary endpoint) remain key clinical trial outcomes. This review aims to give an overview of the different types of functional assessments commonly used in clinical trials and research involving patients with schizophrenia and highlight pertinent challenges surrounding the use of these as reliable, sensitive, and specific assessments in intervention trials. We provide examples of commonly used functional measures and highlight emerging real-time digital assessment tools. Informant- and clinician-rated functional outcome measures and functional capacity assessments are valid, commonly used measures of functional status that try to overcome the need for often overly ambitious and insensitive 'real world' milestones. The wide range of scientific and practical challenges associated with these different tools leave room for the development of improved functional outcome measures for use in clinical trials. In particular, many existing measures fail to capture small, but meaningful, functional changes that may occur over the course of typically short intervention trials. Adding passive digital data collection and short active real-time digital assessments whilst patients go about their day offers the opportunity to build a more fine-grained picture of functional improvements that, if thoughtfully developed and carefully applied, could provide the sensitivity needed to accurately evaluate functional status in intervention studies, aiding the development of desperately needed treatments.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Common currency tasks are tasks that investigate the same phenomenon in different species. In this review, we discuss how to ensure the translational validity of common currency tasks, summarise their benefits, present recent research in this area and offer future directions and recommendations. RECENT FINDINGS: We discuss the strengths and limitations of three specific examples where common currency tasks have added to our understanding of psychiatric constructs-affective bias, reversal learning and goal-based decision making. SUMMARY: Overall, common currency tasks offer the potential to improve drug discovery in psychiatry. We recommend that researchers prioritise construct validity above face validity when designing common currency tasks and suggest that the evidence for construct validity is summarised in papers presenting research in this area.
