Background: Social dysfunction is a hallmark symptom of schizophrenia which commonly precedes the onset of psychosis. It is unclear if social symptoms in clinical high-risk patients reflect depressive symptoms or are a manifestation of negative symptoms.Method: We compared social function scores on the Social Adjustment Scale-Self Report between 56 young people (aged 13–27 years) at clinical high risk for psychosis and 22 healthy controls. The cases were also assessed for depressive and ‘prodromal’ symptoms (subthreshold positive, negative, disorganized and general symptoms).Results: Poor social function was related to both depressive and negative symptoms, as well as to disorganized and general symptoms. The symptoms were highly intercorrelated but linear regression analysis demonstrated that poor social function was primarily explained by negative symptoms within this cohort, particularly in ethnic minority patients.Conclusions: Although this study demonstrated a relationship between social dysfunction and depressive symptoms in clinical high-risk cases, this association was primarily explained by the relationship of each of these to negative symptoms. In individuals at heightened risk for psychosis, affective changes may be related to a progressive decrease in social interaction and loss of reinforcement of social behaviors. These findings have relevance for potential treatment strategies for social dysfunction in schizophrenia and its risk states and predict that antidepressant drugs, cognitive behavioral therapy and/or social skills training may be effective.

Background: Increased sensitivity and exposure to stress are associated with psychotic symptoms in schizophrenia and its risk states, but little is known about the co-evolution of stress sensitivity and exposure with positive and other symptoms in a clinical high-risk (CHR) cohort.Method: A combined cross-sectional and longitudinal design was used to examine the associations over time of stress sensitivity and exposure (i.e. life events) with ‘prodromal’ symptoms in a cohort of 65 CHR patients assessed quarterly for up to 4 years, and at baseline in 24 healthy controls similar in age and gender.Results: Impaired stress tolerance was greater in patients, in whom it was associated over time with positive and negative symptoms, in addition to depression, anxiety and poor function. By contrast, life events were comparable in patients and controls, and bore no association with symptoms. In this treated cohort, there was a trajectory of improvement in stress tolerance, symptoms and function over time.Conclusions: Impaired stress tolerance was associated with a wide range of ‘prodromal’ symptoms, consistent with it being a core feature of the psychosis risk state. Self-reported life events were not relevant as a correlate of clinical status. As in other treated CHR cohorts, most patients improved over time across symptom domains.

Background: There is increasing emphasis on engaging youth in research about youth, their needs, experiences and preferences, notably in health services research. By engaging youth as full partners, research becomes more feasible and relevant, and the validity and richness of findings are enhanced. Consequently, researchers need guidance in engaging youth effectively. This study examines the experiences, needs and knowledge gaps of researchers.Methods: Eighty‐four researchers interested in youth engagement training were recruited via snowball sampling. They completed a survey regarding their youth engagement experiences, attitudes, perceived barriers and capacity development needs. Data were analysed descriptively, and comparisons were made based on current engagement experience.Results: Participants across career stages and disciplines expressed an interest in increased capacity development for youth engagement. They had positive attitudes about the importance and value of youth engagement, but found it to be complex. Participants reported requiring practical guidance to develop their youth engagement practices and interest in a network of youth‐engaged researchers and on‐going training. Those currently engaging youth were more likely to report the need for greater appreciation of youth engagement by funders and institutions.Conclusions: Engaging youth in research has substantial benefits. However, skills in collaborating with youth to design, conduct and implement research have to be learned. Researchers need concrete training and networking opportunities to develop and maximize these skills. They also need mechanisms that formally acknowledge the value of engagement. Researchers and those promoting youth engagement in research are encouraged to consider these findings in their promotion and training endeavours.