Cannabis use severely affects the outcome of people with psychotic disorders, yet there is a lack of treatments. To address this, in 2019 the National Health Service (NHS) Cannabis Clinic for Psychosis (CCP) was developed to support adults suffering from psychosis to reduce and/or stop their cannabis use.

Examine outcome data from the first 46 individuals to complete the CCP's intervention.

The sample (N = 46) consisted of adults (aged ≥ 18) with psychosis under the care of the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, referred to the CCP between January 2020 and February 2023, who completed their intervention by September 2023. Clinical and functional measures were collected before (T0) and after (T1) the CCP intervention (one-to-one sessions and peer group attendance). Primary outcomes were changes in the Cannabis Use Disorders Identification Test-Revised (CUDIT-R) score and pattern of cannabis use. Secondary outcomes included T0–T1 changes in measures of delusions, paranoia, depression, anxiety and functioning.

A reduction in the mean CUDIT-R score was observed between T0 (mean difference = 17.10, 95% CI = 15.54–18.67) and T1, with 73.91% of participants achieving abstinence and 26.09% reducing the frequency and potency of their use. Significant improvements in all clinical and functional outcomes were observed, with 90.70% being in work or education at T1 compared with 8.70% at T0. The variance in CUDIT-R scores explained between 34 and 64% of the variance in our secondary measures.

The CCP intervention is a feasible strategy to support cannabis use cessation/reduction and improve clinical and functional outcomes of people with psychotic disorders.

The association between cannabis and psychosis is established, but the role of underlying genetics is unclear. We used data from the EU-GEI case-control study and UK Biobank to examine the independent and combined effect of heavy cannabis use and schizophrenia polygenic risk score (PRS) on risk for psychosis.

Genome-wide association study summary statistics from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium and the Genomic Psychiatry Cohort were used to calculate schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder (CUD) PRS for 1098 participants from the EU-GEI study and 143600 from the UK Biobank. Both datasets had information on cannabis use.

In both samples, schizophrenia PRS and cannabis use independently increased risk of psychosis. Schizophrenia PRS was not associated with patterns of cannabis use in the EU-GEI cases or controls or UK Biobank cases. It was associated with lifetime and daily cannabis use among UK Biobank participants without psychosis, but the effect was substantially reduced when CUD PRS was included in the model. In the EU-GEI sample, regular users of high-potency cannabis had the highest odds of being a case independently of schizophrenia PRS (OR daily use high-potency cannabis adjusted for PRS = 5.09, 95% CI 3.08–8.43, p = 3.21 × 10−10). We found no evidence of interaction between schizophrenia PRS and patterns of cannabis use.

Regular use of high-potency cannabis remains a strong predictor of psychotic disorder independently of schizophrenia PRS, which does not seem to be associated with heavy cannabis use. These are important findings at a time of increasing use and potency of cannabis worldwide.

Cannabis use and familial vulnerability to psychosis have been associated with social cognition deficits. This study examined the potential relationship between cannabis use and cognitive biases underlying social cognition and functioning in patients with first episode psychosis (FEP), their siblings, and controls.

We analyzed a sample of 543 participants with FEP, 203 siblings, and 1168 controls from the EU-GEI study using a correlational design. We used logistic regression analyses to examine the influence of clinical group, lifetime cannabis use frequency, and potency of cannabis use on cognitive biases, accounting for demographic and cognitive variables.

FEP patients showed increased odds of facial recognition processing (FRP) deficits (OR = 1.642, CI 1.123–2.402) relative to controls but not of speech illusions (SI) or jumping to conclusions (JTC) bias, with no statistically significant differences relative to siblings. Daily and occasional lifetime cannabis use were associated with decreased odds of SI (OR = 0.605, CI 0.368–0.997 and OR = 0.646, CI 0.457–0.913 respectively) and JTC bias (OR = 0.625, CI 0.422–0.925 and OR = 0.602, CI 0.460–0.787 respectively) compared with lifetime abstinence, but not with FRP deficits, in the whole sample. Within the cannabis user group, low-potency cannabis use was associated with increased odds of SI (OR = 1.829, CI 1.297–2.578, FRP deficits (OR = 1.393, CI 1.031–1.882, and JTC (OR = 1.661, CI 1.271–2.171) relative to high-potency cannabis use, with comparable effects in the three clinical groups.

Our findings suggest increased odds of cognitive biases in FEP patients who have never used cannabis and in low-potency users. Future studies should elucidate this association and its potential implications.

A clinical tool to estimate the risk of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) in people with first-episode psychosis (FEP) would inform early detection of TRS and overcome the delay of up to 5 years in starting TRS medication.

To develop and evaluate a model that could predict the risk of TRS in routine clinical practice.

We used data from two UK-based FEP cohorts (GAP and AESOP-10) to develop and internally validate a prognostic model that supports identification of patients at high-risk of TRS soon after FEP diagnosis. Using sociodemographic and clinical predictors, a model for predicting risk of TRS was developed based on penalised logistic regression, with missing data handled using multiple imputation. Internal validation was undertaken via bootstrapping, obtaining optimism-adjusted estimates of the model's performance. Interviews and focus groups with clinicians were conducted to establish clinically relevant risk thresholds and understand the acceptability and perceived utility of the model.

We included seven factors in the prediction model that are predominantly assessed in clinical practice in patients with FEP. The model predicted treatment resistance among the 1081 patients with reasonable accuracy; the model's C-statistic was 0.727 (95% CI 0.723–0.732) prior to shrinkage and 0.687 after adjustment for optimism. Calibration was good (expected/observed ratio: 0.999; calibration-in-the-large: 0.000584) after adjustment for optimism.

We developed and internally validated a prediction model with reasonably good predictive metrics. Clinicians, patients and carers were involved in the development process. External validation of the tool is needed followed by co-design methodology to support implementation in early intervention services.

We examined whether cannabis use contributes to the increased risk of psychotic disorder for non-western minorities in Europe.

We used data from the EU-GEI study (collected at sites in Spain, Italy, France, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands) on 825 first-episode patients and 1026 controls. We estimated the odds ratio (OR) of psychotic disorder for several groups of migrants compared with the local reference population, without and with adjustment for measures of cannabis use.

The OR of psychotic disorder for non-western minorities, adjusted for age, sex, and recruitment area, was 1.80 (95% CI 1.39–2.33). Further adjustment of this OR for frequency of cannabis use had a minimal effect: OR = 1.81 (95% CI 1.38–2.37). The same applied to adjustment for frequency of use of high-potency cannabis. Likewise, adjustments of ORs for most sub-groups of non-western countries had a minimal effect. There were two exceptions. For the Black Caribbean group in London, after adjustment for frequency of use of high-potency cannabis the OR decreased from 2.45 (95% CI 1.25–4.79) to 1.61 (95% CI 0.74–3.51). Similarly, the OR for Surinamese and Dutch Antillean individuals in Amsterdam decreased after adjustment for daily use: from 2.57 (95% CI 1.07–6.15) to 1.67 (95% CI 0.62–4.53).

The contribution of cannabis use to the excess risk of psychotic disorder for non-western minorities was small. However, some evidence of an effect was found for people of Black Caribbean heritage in London and for those of Surinamese and Dutch Antillean heritage in Amsterdam.

Incidence of first-episode psychosis (FEP) varies substantially across geographic regions. Phenotypes of subclinical psychosis (SP), such as psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) and schizotypy, present several similarities with psychosis. We aimed to examine whether SP measures varied across different sites and whether this variation was comparable with FEP incidence within the same areas. We further examined contribution of environmental and genetic factors to SP.

We used data from 1497 controls recruited in 16 different sites across 6 countries. Factor scores for several psychopathological dimensions of schizotypy and PLEs were obtained using multidimensional item response theory models. Variation of these scores was assessed using multi-level regression analysis to estimate individual and between-sites variance adjusting for age, sex, education, migrant, employment and relational status, childhood adversity, and cannabis use. In the final model we added local FEP incidence as a second-level variable. Association with genetic liability was examined separately.

Schizotypy showed a large between-sites variation with up to 15% of variance attributable to site-level characteristics. Adding local FEP incidence to the model considerably reduced the between-sites unexplained schizotypy variance. PLEs did not show as much variation. Overall, SP was associated with younger age, migrant, unmarried, unemployed and less educated individuals, cannabis use, and childhood adversity. Both phenotypes were associated with genetic liability to schizophrenia.

Schizotypy showed substantial between-sites variation, being more represented in areas where FEP incidence is higher. This supports the hypothesis that shared contextual factors shape the between-sites variation of psychosis across the spectrum.

Evidence suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic was accompanied by an increased exposure to risk factors for psychosis, such as psychological stress, substance use, social isolation and deprivation, as well as a potential direct biological impact of the COVID-19 infection on psychosis. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the rates of first-episode psychosis (FEP) has not yet been examined.

The aims of the current study were to 1) establish the FEP incidence between March 2019 and March 2021 in an inner London catchment area; 2) compare FEP incidence rates for the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020 – February 2021), with those for the year prior (March 2019 – February 2020).

We screened the clinical records of all individuals living in the London boroughs of Southwark and Lambeth who were referred to the early intervention in psychosis services before (from 1 March 2019 to 28 February 2020) and during (from 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic. We used Office for National Statistics (ONS) data to estimate the risk populations stratified by sex and age group. We computed crude and sex-age standardised FEP incidence per 100,000 persons-year. We used Poisson regression to calculate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and to examine the incidence variation by sociodemographic factors.

A total of 321 incident cases of FEP were identified during the COVID-19 pandemic accounting for a crude rate of 70.1 (95% CI 62.4 - 77.7) per 100,000 person-year. The crude rate for the year before was 47.5 (95% CI 41.2 - 53.8). The incidence variation between the two years accounted for an adjusted IRR of 1.46 (95% CI 1.23 – 1.76). The increased FEP rates were equally observed across the boroughs of Southwark and Lambeth and men and women. Individuals aged 20-24 (IRR 1.66; 95% CI 1.13 – 2.42) and those from the black ethnic group (IRR 1.61; 95% CI 1·24 – 2·09) showed the greatest incidence increases.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study establishing the variation in FEP incidence before and during the COVID-19 pandemic across all adult age groups. We provide the first evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a 46% increase in the incidence of psychotic disorders in South London. The increase was higher for young individuals and ethnic minorities. This finding should inform public health research and demonstrates the need for adequate resources for mental health secondary services.

None Declared

The closure of forensic psychiatric hospitals and the conversion to a residential model of care based on secure residential units in the community (REMS) has made Italy the first and only country in the world to have followed the principles of the deinstitutionalization movement. Following the reform, several management issues have emerged, such as the creation of long waiting lists for admission to REMS. Improper hospitalization in Acute Psychiatric Units (SPDC) has often been used to address this issue. In addition, the handover of inmates’ care to Mental Health Departments (DSMD’s) has posed further challenges. To date, the field has received little attention from international literature.

Description and analysis of a sample of offender inpatients hospitalized in an acute psychiatric unit.

We conducted a retrospective study including male offenders admitted to the SPDC of San Gerardo Hospital (ASST Monza), between January 2007 and September 2022. Data analysis was performed by using SPSS.

120 male offenders were included for a total of 204 admissions. 98 offenders (81.7%) were hospitalized once. We observed an absolute (N=1; N=30) and percentage (0.2%;12%) increase in the number of hospitalized offenders per year during the time period under study. Jail was the main provenance in the sample (46.6%), followed by residential care facilities (27%) and the psychiatric observation unit (ROP) of Monza’s jail (10.8%). The two most prevalent diagnoses were personality disorders (37.5%) and psychosis (39.2%). In addition, 66 subjects (55%) had a history of substance abuse. The average duration of hospitalization was 19.45 days; it increased to 77 days for inpatients waiting to be transferred to REMS. Hetero-aggressive behavior as the reason for admission was associated with longer hospitalization (p=0.031), while attempted suicide correlated to shorter hospital stay (p=0.032). Out of the 55 offenders who attempted suicide, 41 came from jail (74.5%). Finally, longer hospitalizations were associated with an increased number of adverse events (p=0.001).

Psychiatric hospitalizations of offenders have increased over the last years. This population tends to require longer hospital stays (regional average of SPDC hospitalization in Lombardy: 14 days), which are even lengthier for inpatients destined to REMS. Longer hospitalizations exert a large burden on DSMD’s and impact the general health of patients, exposing them to a higher risk of adverse events. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings and to develop better strategies for the management and care of offender patients.

None Declared

Childhood adversity and cannabis use are considered independent risk factors for psychosis, but whether different patterns of cannabis use may be acting as mediator between adversity and psychotic disorders has not yet been explored. The aim of this study is to examine whether cannabis use mediates the relationship between childhood adversity and psychosis.

Data were utilised on 881 first-episode psychosis patients and 1231 controls from the European network of national schizophrenia networks studying Gene–Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study. Detailed history of cannabis use was collected with the Cannabis Experience Questionnaire. The Childhood Experience of Care and Abuse Questionnaire was used to assess exposure to household discord, sexual, physical or emotional abuse and bullying in two periods: early (0–11 years), and late (12–17 years). A path decomposition method was used to analyse whether the association between childhood adversity and psychosis was mediated by (1) lifetime cannabis use, (2) cannabis potency and (3) frequency of use.

The association between household discord and psychosis was partially mediated by lifetime use of cannabis (indirect effect coef. 0.078, s.e. 0.022, 17%), its potency (indirect effect coef. 0.059, s.e. 0.018, 14%) and by frequency (indirect effect coef. 0.117, s.e. 0.038, 29%). Similar findings were obtained when analyses were restricted to early exposure to household discord.

Harmful patterns of cannabis use mediated the association between specific childhood adversities, like household discord, with later psychosis. Children exposed to particularly challenging environments in their household could benefit from psychosocial interventions aimed at preventing cannabis misuse.

While cannabis use is a well-established risk factor for psychosis, little is known about any association between reasons for first using cannabis (RFUC) and later patterns of use and risk of psychosis.

We used data from 11 sites of the multicentre European Gene-Environment Interaction (EU-GEI) case–control study. 558 first-episode psychosis patients (FEPp) and 567 population controls who had used cannabis and reported their RFUC.

We ran logistic regressions to examine whether RFUC were associated with first-episode psychosis (FEP) case–control status. Path analysis then examined the relationship between RFUC, subsequent patterns of cannabis use, and case–control status.

Controls (86.1%) and FEPp (75.63%) were most likely to report ‘because of friends’ as their most common RFUC. However, 20.1% of FEPp compared to 5.8% of controls reported: ‘to feel better’ as their RFUC (χ2 = 50.97; p < 0.001). RFUC ‘to feel better’ was associated with being a FEPp (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.03–2.95) while RFUC ‘with friends’ was associated with being a control (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37–0.83). The path model indicated an association between RFUC ‘to feel better’ with heavy cannabis use and with FEPp-control status.

Both FEPp and controls usually started using cannabis with their friends, but more patients than controls had begun to use ‘to feel better’. People who reported their reason for first using cannabis to ‘feel better’ were more likely to progress to heavy use and develop a psychotic disorder than those reporting ‘because of friends’.

Tobacco is a highly prevalent substance of abuse in patients with psychosis. Previous studies have reported an association between tobacco use and schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between tobacco use and first-episode psychosis (FEP), age at onset of psychosis, and specific diagnosis of psychosis.

The sample consisted of 1105 FEP patients and 1355 controls from the European Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene–Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study. We assessed substance use with the Tobacco and Alcohol Questionnaire and performed a series of regression analyses using case-control status, age of onset of psychosis, and diagnosis as outcomes and tobacco use and frequency of tobacco use as predictors. Analyses were adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, alcohol, and cannabis use.

After controlling for cannabis use, FEP patients were 2.6 times more likely to use tobacco [p ⩽ 0.001; adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 2.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) [2.1–3.2]] and 1.7 times more likely to smoke 20 or more cigarettes a day (p = 0.003; AOR 1.7; 95% CI [1.2–2.4]) than controls. Tobacco use was associated with an earlier age at psychosis onset (β = −2.3; p ⩽ 0.001; 95% CI [−3.7 to −0.9]) and was 1.3 times more frequent in FEP patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia than in other diagnoses of psychosis (AOR 1.3; 95% CI [1.0–1.8]); however, these results were no longer significant after controlling for cannabis use.

Tobacco and heavy-tobacco use are associated with increased odds of FEP. These findings further support the relevance of tobacco prevention in young populations.

Cannabis use has been linked to psychotic disorders but this association has been primarily observed in the Global North. This study investigates patterns of cannabis use and associations with psychoses in three Global South (regions within Latin America, Asia, Africa and Oceania) settings.

Case–control study within the International Programme of Research on Psychotic Disorders (INTREPID) II conducted between May 2018 and September 2020. In each setting, we recruited over 200 individuals with an untreated psychosis and individually-matched controls (Kancheepuram India; Ibadan, Nigeria; northern Trinidad). Controls, with no past or current psychotic disorder, were individually-matched to cases by 5-year age group, sex and neighbourhood. Presence of psychotic disorder assessed using the Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry and cannabis exposure measured by the World Health Organisation Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST).

Cases reported higher lifetime and frequent cannabis use than controls in each setting. In Trinidad, cannabis use was associated with increased odds of psychotic disorder: lifetime cannabis use (adj. OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.99–2.53); frequent cannabis use (adj. OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.10–3.60); cannabis dependency (as measured by high ASSIST score) (adj. OR 4.70, 95% CI 1.77–12.47), early age of first use (adj. OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.03–3.27). Cannabis use in the other two settings was too rare to examine associations.

In line with previous studies, we found associations between cannabis use and the occurrence and age of onset of psychoses in Trinidad. These findings have implications for strategies for prevention of psychosis.

Child maltreatment (CM) and migrant status are independently associated with psychosis. We examined prevalence of CM by migrant status and tested whether migrant status moderated the association between CM and first-episode psychosis (FEP). We further explored whether differences in CM exposure contributed to variations in the incidence rates of FEP by migrant status.

We included FEP patients aged 18–64 years in 14 European sites and recruited controls representative of the local populations. Migrant status was operationalized according to generation (first/further) and region of origin (Western/non-Western countries). The reference population was composed by individuals of host country's ethnicity. CM was assessed with Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. Prevalence ratios of CM were estimated using Poisson regression. We examined the moderation effect of migrant status on the odds of FEP by CM fitting adjusted logistic regressions with interaction terms. Finally, we calculated the population attributable fractions (PAFs) for CM by migrant status.

We examined 849 FEP cases and 1142 controls. CM prevalence was higher among migrants, their descendants and migrants of non-Western heritage. Migrant status, classified by generation (likelihood test ratio:χ2 = 11.3, p = 0.004) or by region of origin (likelihood test ratio:χ2 = 11.4, p = 0.003), attenuated the association between CM and FEP. PAFs for CM were higher among all migrant groups compared with the reference populations.

The higher exposure to CM, despite a smaller effect on the odds of FEP, accounted for a greater proportion of incident FEP cases among migrants. Policies aimed at reducing CM should consider the increased vulnerability of specific subpopulations.

Gene x environment (G×E) interactions, i.e. genetic modulation of the sensitivity to environmental factors and/or environmental control of the gene expression, have not been reliably established regarding aetiology of psychotic disorders. Moreover, recent studies have shown associations between the polygenic risk scores for schizophrenia (PRS-SZ) and some risk factors of psychotic disorders, challenging the traditional gene v. environment dichotomy. In the present article, we studied the role of GxE interaction between psychosocial stressors (childhood trauma, stressful life-events, self-reported discrimination experiences and low social capital) and the PRS-SZ on subclinical psychosis in a population-based sample.

Data were drawn from the EUropean network of national schizophrenia networks studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study, in which subjects without psychotic disorders were included in six countries. The sample was restricted to European descendant subjects (n = 706). Subclinical dimensions of psychosis (positive, negative, and depressive) were measured by the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) scale. Associations between the PRS-SZ and the psychosocial stressors were tested. For each dimension, the interactions between genes and environment were assessed using linear models and comparing explained variances of ‘Genetic’ models (solely fitted with PRS-SZ), ‘Environmental’ models (solely fitted with each environmental stressor), ‘Independent’ models (with PRS-SZ and each environmental factor), and ‘Interaction’ models (Independent models plus an interaction term between the PRS-SZ and each environmental factor). Likelihood ration tests (LRT) compared the fit of the different models.

There were no genes-environment associations. PRS-SZ was associated with positive dimensions (β = 0.092, R2 = 7.50%), and most psychosocial stressors were associated with all three subclinical psychotic dimensions (except social capital and positive dimension). Concerning the positive dimension, Independent models fitted better than Environmental and Genetic models. No significant GxE interaction was observed for any dimension.

This study in subjects without psychotic disorders suggests that (i) the aetiological continuum hypothesis could concern particularly the positive dimension of subclinical psychosis, (ii) genetic and environmental factors have independent effects on the level of this positive dimension, (iii) and that interactions between genetic and individual environmental factors could not be identified in this sample.

Schizophrenia (SZ), bipolar disorder (BD) and depression (D) run in families. This susceptibility is partly due to hundreds or thousands of common genetic variants, each conferring a fractional risk. The cumulative effects of the associated variants can be summarised as a polygenic risk score (PRS). Using data from the EUropean Network of national schizophrenia networks studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) first episode case–control study, we aimed to test whether PRSs for three major psychiatric disorders (SZ, BD, D) and for intelligent quotient (IQ) as a neurodevelopmental proxy, can discriminate affective psychosis (AP) from schizophrenia-spectrum disorder (SSD).

Participants (842 cases, 1284 controls) from 16 European EU-GEI sites were successfully genotyped following standard quality control procedures. The sample was stratified based on genomic ancestry and analyses were done only on the subsample representing the European population (573 cases, 1005 controls). Using PRS for SZ, BD, D, and IQ built from the latest available summary statistics, we performed simple or multinomial logistic regression models adjusted for 10 principal components for the different clinical comparisons.

In case–control comparisons PRS-SZ, PRS-BD and PRS-D distributed differentially across psychotic subcategories. In case–case comparisons, both PRS-SZ [odds ratio (OR) = 0.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54–0.92] and PRS-D (OR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.06–1.61) differentiated AP from SSD; and within AP categories, only PRS-SZ differentiated BD from psychotic depression (OR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.23–3.74).

Combining PRS for severe psychiatric disorders in prediction models for psychosis phenotypes can increase discriminative ability and improve our understanding of these phenotypes. Our results point towards the potential usefulness of PRSs in specific populations such as high-risk or early psychosis phases.

A history of childhood adversity is associated with psychotic disorder, with an increase in risk according to the number of exposures. However, it is not known why only some exposed individuals go on to develop psychosis. One possibility is pre-existing polygenic vulnerability. Here, we investigated, in the largest sample of first-episode psychosis (FEP) cases to date, whether childhood adversity and high polygenic risk scores for schizophrenia (SZ-PRS) combine synergistically to increase the risk of psychosis, over and above the effect of each alone.

We assigned a schizophrenia-polygenic risk score (SZ-PRS), calculated from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC2), to all participants in a sample of 384 FEP patients and 690 controls from the case–control component of the EU-GEI study. Only participants of European ancestry were included in the study. A history of childhood adversity was collected using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ). Synergistic effects were estimated using the interaction contrast ratio (ICR) [odds ratio (OR)exposure and PRS − ORexposure − ORPRS + 1] with adjustment for potential confounders.

There was some evidence that the combined effect of childhood adversities and polygenic risk was greater than the sum of each alone, as indicated by an ICR greater than zero [i.e. ICR 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.29 to 3.85]. Examining subtypes of childhood adversities, the strongest synergetic effect was observed for physical abuse (ICR 6.25, 95% CI −6.25 to 20.88).

Our findings suggest possible synergistic effects of genetic liability and childhood adversity experiences in the onset of FEP, but larger samples are needed to increase precision of estimates.

Child abuse is associated with a wide range of mental disease including psychotic disorders. Few studies have investigated the role of child abuse in contributing to increase the risk of psychosis in migrant population.

To explore the risk of first episode psychosis (FEP) in migrants and natives for each type of trauma i.e. physical abuse (P.A.), sexual abuse (S.A.), emotional abuse (E.A.), physical neglect (P.N.) and emotional neglect (E.N.).

Within a large case- control incidence sample of FEP from the EU-GEI study (The EUropean Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene–Environment Interactions) we evalued the assocition of childhood trauma with FEP in migrants and natives. Associations were adjusted for age, gender, social status, level of education, family history of psychosis and cannabis use. Trauma was assessed through Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ).

CTQ mean score was higher in FEP migrants (45.4, sd 15.6) than in FEP natives (41.7, sd 13.9) (p = 0.002). In natives every type of child abuse was associated with FEP. In migrants P.A., S.A., P.N. were associated with FEP. We found a dose – dependent relationship between trauma and FEP.

Child abuse is common in individuals with psychosis. FEP migrants are more exposed to childhood trauma. Clinicians should routinely assess patients for childhood trauma. When treating a FEP migrant patient, clinicians must be aware of an underlying traumatic childhood adversity more than of a traumatic migration history.

Perceived discrimination is associated with worse mental health. Few studies have assessed whether perceived discrimination (i) is associated with the risk of psychotic disorders and (ii) contributes to an increased risk among minority ethnic groups relative to the ethnic majority.

We used data from the European Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene-Environment Interactions Work Package 2, a population-based case−control study of incident psychotic disorders in 17 catchment sites across six countries. We calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the associations between perceived discrimination and psychosis using mixed-effects logistic regression models. We used stratified and mediation analyses to explore differences for minority ethnic groups.

Reporting any perceived experience of major discrimination (e.g. unfair treatment by police, not getting hired) was higher in cases than controls (41.8% v. 34.2%). Pervasive experiences of discrimination (≥3 types) were also higher in cases than controls (11.3% v. 5.5%). In fully adjusted models, the odds of psychosis were 1.20 (95% CI 0.91–1.59) for any discrimination and 1.79 (95% CI 1.19–1.59) for pervasive discrimination compared with no discrimination. In stratified analyses, the magnitude of association for pervasive experiences of discrimination appeared stronger for minority ethnic groups (OR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.12–2.68) than the ethnic majority (OR = 1.42, 95% CI 0.65–3.10). In exploratory mediation analysis, pervasive discrimination minimally explained excess risk among minority ethnic groups (5.1%).

Pervasive experiences of discrimination are associated with slightly increased odds of psychotic disorders and may minimally help explain excess risk for minority ethnic groups.