The Green et al., Paranoid Thoughts Scale (GPTS) – comprising two 16-item scales assessing ideas of reference (Part A) and ideas of persecution (Part B) – was developed over a decade ago. Our aim was to conduct the first large-scale psychometric evaluation.

In total, 10 551 individuals provided GPTS data. Four hundred and twenty-two patients with psychosis and 805 non-clinical individuals completed GPTS Parts A and B. An additional 1743 patients with psychosis and 7581 non-clinical individuals completed GPTS Part B. Factor analysis, item response theory, and receiver operating characteristic analyses were conducted.

The original two-factor structure of the GPTS had an inadequate model fit: Part A did not form a unidimensional scale and multiple items were locally dependant. A Revised-GPTS (R-GPTS) was formed, comprising eight-item ideas of reference and 10-item ideas of persecution subscales, which had an excellent model fit. All items in the new Reference (a = 2.09–3.67) and Persecution (a = 2.37–4.38) scales were strongly discriminative of shifts in paranoia and had high reliability across the spectrum of severity (a > 0.90). The R-GPTS score ranges are: average (Reference: 0–9; Persecution: 0–4); elevated (Reference: 10–15; Persecution: 5–10); moderately severe (Reference: 16–20; Persecution:11–17); severe (Reference: 21–24; Persecution: 18–27); and very severe (Reference: 25+; Persecution: 28+). Recommended cut-offs on the persecution scale are 11 to discriminate clinical levels of persecutory ideation and 18 for a likely persecutory delusion.

The psychometric evaluation indicated a need to improve the GPTS. The R-GPTS is a more precise measure, has excellent psychometric properties, and is recommended for future studies of paranoia.

Refractory depression is a major contributor to the economic burden of depression. Radically open dialectical behaviour therapy (RO DBT) is an unevaluated new treatment targeting overcontrolled personality, common in refractory depression, but it is not yet known whether the additional expense of RO DBT is good value for money.

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of RO DBT plus treatment as usual (TAU) compared with TAU alone in people with refractory depression (trial registration: ISRCTN85784627).

We undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomised trial evaluating RO DBT plus TAU versus TAU alone for refractory depression in three UK secondary care centres. Our economic evaluation, 12 months after randomisation, adopted the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services. It evaluated cost-effectiveness by comparing the net cost of RO DBT with the net gain in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), estimated using the EQ-5D-3L measure of health-related quality of life.

The additional cost of RO DBT plus TAU compared with TAU alone was £7048 and was associated with a difference of 0.032 QALYs, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £220 250 per QALY. This ICER was well above the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) upper threshold of £30 000 per QALY. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve indicated that RO DBT had a zero probability of being cost-effective compared with TAU at the NICE £30 000 threshold.

In its current resource-intensive form, RO DBT is not a cost-effective use of resources in the UK NHS.

R.H. is co-owner and director of Radically Open Ltd, the RO DBT training and dissemination company. D.K. reports grants outside the submitted work from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). T.L. receives royalties from New Harbinger Publishing for sales of RO DBT treatment manuals, speaking fees from Radically Open Ltd, and a grant outside the submitted work from the Medical Research Council. He was co-director of Radically Open Ltd between November 2014 and May 2015 and is married to Erica Smith-Lynch, the principal shareholder and one of two directors of Radically Open Ltd. H.O'M. reports personal fees outside the submitted work from the Charlie Waller Institute and Improving Access to Psychological Therapy. S.R. provides RO DBT supervision through her company S C Rushbrook Ltd. I.R. reports grants outside the submitted work from NIHR and Health & Care Research Wales. M. Stanton reports personal fees outside the submitted work from British Isles DBT Training, Stanton Psychological Services Ltd and Taylor & Francis. M. Swales reports personal fees outside the submitted work from British Isles DBT Training, Guilford Press, Oxford University Press and Taylor & Francis. B.W. was co-director of Radically Open Ltd between November 2014 and February 2015.

Individuals with depression often do not respond to medication or psychotherapy. Radically open dialectical behaviour therapy (RO DBT) is a new treatment targeting overcontrolled personality, common in refractory depression.

To compare RO DBT plus treatment as usual (TAU) for refractory depression with TAU alone (trial registration: ISRCTN 85784627).

RO DBT comprised 29 therapy sessions and 27 skills classes over 6 months. Our completed randomised trial evaluated RO DBT for refractory depression over 18 months in three British secondary care centres. Of 250 adult participants, we randomised 162 (65%) to RO DBT. The primary outcome was the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD), assessed masked and analysed by treatment allocated.

After 7 months, immediately following therapy, RO DBT had significantly reduced depressive symptoms by 5.40 points on the HRSD relative to TAU (95% CI 0.94–9.85). After 12 months (primary end-point), the difference of 2.15 points on the HRSD in favour of RO DBT was not significant (95% CI –2.28 to 6.59); nor was that of 1.69 points on the HRSD at 18 months (95% CI –2.84 to 6.22). Throughout RO DBT participants reported significantly better psychological flexibility and emotional coping than controls. However, they reported eight possible serious adverse reactions compared with none in the control group.

The RO DBT group reported significantly lower HRSD scores than the control group after 7 months, but not thereafter. The imbalance in serious adverse reactions was probably because of the controls' limited opportunities to report these.

Implementation of evidence-based psychosocial interventions in accordance with National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines and quality standards has been incomplete. This project involved allocation of adults under mental health services to six guideline categories, completion of a clinician- and patient-rated outcome measure, and individual assessment against clinical standards.

In the first 3 months of the project, 5048 patients were allocated to a pathway and 3734 (73%) were assessed against at least one of the relevant standards. All were assessed using the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (91–93% of scales completed) and 1866 (36%) completed the patient-rated outcome measure, DIALOG.

Clinicians will allocate patients to pathways, complete outcome measures and assess against standards, providing data to guide practice, service design and costing of mental health systems with supporting technology to assist data entry and presentation. This has the potential to provide much improved and readily accessible information about individual outcomes and standards for people with mental health problems and those working with them. It could also provide a method for payment for services which directly support good clinical practice.

1. (1) To develop a dialogue and practice with confidence when addressing issues of self-disclosure with diverse populations.

2. (2) To appreciate the impact therapist self-disclosure has in early stages of engagement, in particular when working with patients from BME communities.

3. (3) To understand the impact and role of self-disclosure as initiated by patients.

4. (4) To increase therapist awareness on cultural differences in self-disclosure and develop ways to address this in therapy.

5. (5) To challenge therapists to adapt psychological therapies to diverse cultures and be cognisant that ‘one size does not fit all’.

The cognitive process of worry, which keeps negative thoughts in mind and elaborates the content, contributes to the occurrence of many mental health disorders. Our principal aim was to develop a straightforward measure of general problematic worry suitable for research and clinical treatment. Our secondary aim was to develop a measure of problematic worry specifically concerning paranoid fears.

An item pool concerning worry in the past month was evaluated in 250 non-clinical individuals and 50 patients with psychosis in a worry treatment trial. Exploratory factor analysis and item response theory (IRT) informed the selection of scale items. IRT analyses were repeated with the scales administered to 273 non-clinical individuals, 79 patients with psychosis and 93 patients with social anxiety disorder. Other clinical measures were administered to assess concurrent validity. Test-retest reliability was assessed with 75 participants. Sensitivity to change was assessed with 43 patients with psychosis.

A 10-item general worry scale (Dunn Worry Questionnaire; DWQ) and a five-item paranoia worry scale (Paranoia Worries Questionnaire; PWQ) were developed. All items were highly discriminative (DWQ a = 1.98–5.03; PWQ a = 4.10–10.7), indicating small increases in latent worry lead to a high probability of item endorsement. The DWQ was highly informative across a wide range of the worry distribution, whilst the PWQ had greatest precision at clinical levels of paranoia worry. The scales demonstrated excellent internal reliability, test-retest reliability, concurrent validity and sensitivity to change.

The new measures of general problematic worry and worry about paranoid fears have excellent psychometric properties.

None.

Brief cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) is an emerging treatment for schizophrenia in community settings; however, further trials are needed, especially in non-Western countries.

To test the effects of brief CBT for Chinese patients with schizophrenia in the community (trial registration: ChiCTR-TRC-13003709).

A total of 220 patients with schizophrenia from four districts of Beijing were randomly assigned to either brief CBT plus treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU alone. Patients were assessed at baseline, post-treatment and at 6- and 12-month follow-ups by raters masked to group allocation.

At the post-treatment assessment and the 12-month follow-up, patients who received brief CBT showed greater improvement in overall symptoms, general psychopathology, insight and social functioning. In total, 37.3% of those in the brief CBT plus TAU group experienced a clinically significant response, compared with only 19.1% of those in the TAU alone group (P = 0.003).

Brief CBT has a positive effect on Chinese patients with schizophrenia in the community.

A better therapeutic relationship predicts better outcomes. However, there is no trial-based evidence on how to improve therapeutic relationships in psychosis.

To test the effectiveness of communication training for psychiatrists on improving shared understanding and the therapeutic relationship (trial registration: ISRCTN94846422).

In a cluster randomised controlled trial in the UK, 21 psychiatrists were randomised. Ninety-seven (51% of those approached) out-patients with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder were recruited, and 64 (66% of the sample recruited at baseline) were followed up after 5 months. The intervention group received four group and one individualised session. The primary outcome, rated blind, was psychiatrist effort in establishing shared understanding (self-repair). Secondary outcome was the therapeutic relationship.

Psychiatrists receiving the intervention used 44% more self-repair than the control group (adjusted difference in means 6.4, 95% CI 1.46–11.33, P<0.011, a large effect) adjusting for baseline self-repair. Psychiatrists rated the therapeutic relationship more positively (adjusted difference in means 0.20, 95% CI 0.03–0.37, P = 0.022, a medium effect), as did patients (adjusted difference in means 0.21, 95% CI 0.01–0.41, P = 0.043, a medium effect).

Shared understanding can be successfully targeted in training and improves relationships in treating psychosis.