Unraveling the Concept of Childhood Adversity in Psychosis Research: A Systematic Review

Author:

Sætren Sjur S12ORCID,Bjørnestad Jone R234ORCID,Ottesen Akiah A5,Fisher Helen L67ORCID,Olsen Daniel A S2,Hølland Kari3,Hegelstad Wenche ten Velden23

Affiliation:

1. Department for Child and Adolescent Research, Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies , Oslo , Norway

2. TIPS Centre for Clinical Research in Psychosis, Stavanger University Hospital , Stavanger , Norway

3. Institute of Social Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stavanger , Stavanger , Norway

4. Department of Psychiatry, District General Hospital of Førde , Førde , Norway

5. NORMENT, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital & Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo , Oslo , Norway

6. Social, Genetic & Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London , London , UK

7. ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health, King’s College London , London , UK

Abstract

Abstract Background During the last decades, an abundance of studies has investigated childhood adversity in relation to psychosis. This systematic review critically examines the methodologies employed to investigate childhood adversity in psychosis over the past decade, including operational definitions, measurement tools and characteristics, and psychometric properties of instruments used in these studies. Study Design This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines (registration number CRD42022307096), and the search used the following electronic databases: PsychINFO, SCOPUS, Web of Science, African Index Medicus (AIM), LILACS, CINAHL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. The search included variations and combinations of the terms targeting childhood adversity and psychosis. Study Results Out of 585 identified studies published between 2010 and 2023, 341 employed a validated instrument to investigate childhood adversity. Our findings show “childhood trauma” being the most frequently examined construct, followed by “child maltreatment” or “child abuse.” The short version of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire was the dominant instrument. Physical abuse, emotional abuse, and sexual abuse were most frequently investigated, and indeed the field appears generally to focus on child abuse and neglect over other adversities. Significant psychometric heterogeneity was observed in the selection and summarization of instrument items, with only 59% of studies documenting original psychometric validation and 22% reporting reliability in their datasets. Conclusion This review highlights substantial methodological heterogeneity in the field, pointing out biases in the research on childhood adversity and psychosis. These findings underline the need for standardized definitions and high-quality measurement tools to enhance the validity of future research in this area.

Funder

Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Centre for Society and Mental Health at King’s College London

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3