I Verdaasdonk, M A Charalambides, D Baumeister, M Jackson, P A Garety, C Morgan, T Ward, E Peters
{"title":"受害经历时间表:在有或没有护理需要的精神病经历的个体中,情境化人际创伤和感知歧视。","authors":"I Verdaasdonk, M A Charalambides, D Baumeister, M Jackson, P A Garety, C Morgan, T Ward, E Peters","doi":"10.1007/s00127-025-02917-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Victimisation is associated with psychotic experiences (PEs) across the psychosis continuum, yet contextual factors possibly influencing outcomes have been neglected. Building on the Unusual Experiences Enquiry study (UNIQUE) showing higher childhood trauma but lower discrimination in individuals with PEs without a need-for-care, compared to those with a need-for-care, this study utilized a novel instrument to examine victimisation-related contextual factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individuals from the UNIQUE study with persistent PEs with (clinical, n = 82) and without (non-clinical, n = 92) a need-for-care, and a control group without PEs (n = 83), completed the Victimisation Experiences Schedule (VES). This multidimensional instrument, comprising items from validated measures, assesses interpersonal traumas and discriminatory experiences, alongside contextual factors: impact, powerlessness, social support, age, duration, frequency, victim-perpetrator relationships, and reasons for discrimination.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no differences in lifetime interpersonal traumas between the clinical and non-clinical groups, with the latter reporting slightly more than controls. The clinical group experienced more lifetime perceived discrimination than the other groups. No differences emerged in impact and powerlessness at the time of victimisation; however, the clinical group reported lower positive social support and higher current impact and powerlessness for both types of victimisation. Discrimination occurred earlier and lasted longer in the clinical group than the other groups, often attributed to mental health and race/ethnicity, likely reflecting a higher proportion of racially minoritized individuals.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results suggest an interplay between risk and protective factors around victimisation that may shape outcomes, highlighting the importance of assessing contextual factors of victimisation using comprehensive tools like the VES.</p>","PeriodicalId":49510,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The victimisation experience schedule: contextualising interpersonal trauma and perceived discrimination in individuals with psychotic experiences with and without a need-for-care.\",\"authors\":\"I Verdaasdonk, M A Charalambides, D Baumeister, M Jackson, P A Garety, C Morgan, T Ward, E Peters\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00127-025-02917-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Victimisation is associated with psychotic experiences (PEs) across the psychosis continuum, yet contextual factors possibly influencing outcomes have been neglected. Building on the Unusual Experiences Enquiry study (UNIQUE) showing higher childhood trauma but lower discrimination in individuals with PEs without a need-for-care, compared to those with a need-for-care, this study utilized a novel instrument to examine victimisation-related contextual factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individuals from the UNIQUE study with persistent PEs with (clinical, n = 82) and without (non-clinical, n = 92) a need-for-care, and a control group without PEs (n = 83), completed the Victimisation Experiences Schedule (VES). This multidimensional instrument, comprising items from validated measures, assesses interpersonal traumas and discriminatory experiences, alongside contextual factors: impact, powerlessness, social support, age, duration, frequency, victim-perpetrator relationships, and reasons for discrimination.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no differences in lifetime interpersonal traumas between the clinical and non-clinical groups, with the latter reporting slightly more than controls. The clinical group experienced more lifetime perceived discrimination than the other groups. No differences emerged in impact and powerlessness at the time of victimisation; however, the clinical group reported lower positive social support and higher current impact and powerlessness for both types of victimisation. Discrimination occurred earlier and lasted longer in the clinical group than the other groups, often attributed to mental health and race/ethnicity, likely reflecting a higher proportion of racially minoritized individuals.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results suggest an interplay between risk and protective factors around victimisation that may shape outcomes, highlighting the importance of assessing contextual factors of victimisation using comprehensive tools like the VES.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49510,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-025-02917-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-025-02917-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The victimisation experience schedule: contextualising interpersonal trauma and perceived discrimination in individuals with psychotic experiences with and without a need-for-care.
Purpose: Victimisation is associated with psychotic experiences (PEs) across the psychosis continuum, yet contextual factors possibly influencing outcomes have been neglected. Building on the Unusual Experiences Enquiry study (UNIQUE) showing higher childhood trauma but lower discrimination in individuals with PEs without a need-for-care, compared to those with a need-for-care, this study utilized a novel instrument to examine victimisation-related contextual factors.
Methods: Individuals from the UNIQUE study with persistent PEs with (clinical, n = 82) and without (non-clinical, n = 92) a need-for-care, and a control group without PEs (n = 83), completed the Victimisation Experiences Schedule (VES). This multidimensional instrument, comprising items from validated measures, assesses interpersonal traumas and discriminatory experiences, alongside contextual factors: impact, powerlessness, social support, age, duration, frequency, victim-perpetrator relationships, and reasons for discrimination.
Results: There were no differences in lifetime interpersonal traumas between the clinical and non-clinical groups, with the latter reporting slightly more than controls. The clinical group experienced more lifetime perceived discrimination than the other groups. No differences emerged in impact and powerlessness at the time of victimisation; however, the clinical group reported lower positive social support and higher current impact and powerlessness for both types of victimisation. Discrimination occurred earlier and lasted longer in the clinical group than the other groups, often attributed to mental health and race/ethnicity, likely reflecting a higher proportion of racially minoritized individuals.
Conclusion: The results suggest an interplay between risk and protective factors around victimisation that may shape outcomes, highlighting the importance of assessing contextual factors of victimisation using comprehensive tools like the VES.
期刊介绍:
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology is intended to provide a medium for the prompt publication of scientific contributions concerned with all aspects of the epidemiology of psychiatric disorders - social, biological and genetic.
In addition, the journal has a particular focus on the effects of social conditions upon behaviour and the relationship between psychiatric disorders and the social environment. Contributions may be of a clinical nature provided they relate to social issues, or they may deal with specialised investigations in the fields of social psychology, sociology, anthropology, epidemiology, health service research, health economies or public mental health. We will publish papers on cross-cultural and trans-cultural themes. We do not publish case studies or small case series. While we will publish studies of reliability and validity of new instruments of interest to our readership, we will not publish articles reporting on the performance of established instruments in translation.
Both original work and review articles may be submitted.