Longitudinal Trajectories of Premorbid Social and Academic Adjustment in Youth at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Implications for Conversion.

Background and Hypothesis: Social and academic adjustment deteriorate in the years preceding a psychotic disorder diagnosis. Analyses of premorbid adjustment have recently been extended into the clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR) syndrome to identify risk factors and developmental pathways toward psychotic disorders. Work so far has been at the between-person level, which has constrained analyses of premorbid adjustment, clinical covariates, and conversion to psychosis.
Study Design: Growth-curve models examined longitudinal trajectories in retrospective reports of premorbid social and academic adjustment from youth at CHR (n = 498). Interaction models tested whether known covariates of premorbid adjustment problems (attenuated negative symptoms, cognition, and childhood trauma) were associated with different premorbid adjustment trajectories in converters vs non-converters (ie, participants who did/did not develop psychotic disorders within 2-year follow-up).
Study Results: Converters reported poorer social adjustment throughout the premorbid period. Converters who developed psychosis with an affective component reported poorer academic adjustment throughout the premorbid period than those who developed non-affective psychosis. Tentatively, baseline attenuated negative symptoms may have been associated with worsening social adjustment in the premorbid period for non-converters only. Childhood trauma impact was associated with fewer academic functioning problems among converters. Cognition effects did not differ based on conversion status.
Conclusions: Premorbid social function is an important factor in risk for conversion to psychosis. Negative symptoms and childhood trauma had different relationships to premorbid functioning in converters vs non-converters. Mechanisms linking symptoms and trauma to functional impairment may be different in converters vs non-converters, suggesting possible new avenues for risk assessment.
(© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Maryland Psychiatric Research Center. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)