During adolescence and young adulthood people appear to be more prone to violent behaviour. A greater tendency to violent behaviour appears to be associated with hyperactivity, impulsivity and low tolerance for frustration and provocation in social settings.

This prospective cohort study aimed to evaluate rates of violent behaviour among young people with mental disorders, compared with older age groups.

A total of 340 individuals with severe mental disorders (125 living in residential facilities and 215 out-patients) were evaluated at baseline with the SCID-I and II, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Specific Level of Functioning scale, Brown–Goodwin Lifetime History of Aggression scale, Buss–Durkee Hostility Inventory, Barratt Impulsiveness Scale and State–Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2. Aggressive behaviour was rated every 15 days with the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS).

The sample comprised 28 individuals aged 18–29 years, 202 aged 30–49 and 110 aged 50 and over. Younger age was associated with a personality disorder diagnosis, substance use disorder, being single and employed. These results were confirmed even controlling for the gender effect. The patterns of the cumulative MOAS mean scores showed that younger (18–29 years old) individuals were significantly more aggressive than older (≥50) ones (P < 0.001).

This study highlights how young age in people with severe mental disorders is correlated with higher levels of impulsivity, anger and hostility, confirming previous analyses. Our results may assist clinicians in implementing early interventions to improve anger and impulsivity control to reduce the risk of future aggressive behaviours.

The relationship between schizophrenia and violence is complex. The aim of this multicentre case–control study was to examine and compare the characteristics of a group of forensic psychiatric patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorders and a history of significant interpersonal violence to a group of patients with the same diagnosis but no lifetime history of interpersonal violence.

Overall, 398 patients (221 forensic and 177 non-forensic patients) were recruited across five European Countries (Italy, Germany, Poland, Austria and the United Kingdom) and assessed using a multidimensional standardised process.

The most common primary diagnosis in both groups was schizophrenia (76.4%), but forensic patients more often met criteria for a comorbid personality disorder, almost always antisocial personality disorder (49.1 v. 0%). The forensic patients reported lower levels of disability and better social functioning. Forensic patients were more likely to have been exposed to severe violence in childhood. Education was a protective factor against future violence as well as higher levels of disability, lower social functioning and poorer performances in cognitive processing speed tasks, perhaps as proxy markers of the negative syndrome of schizophrenia. Forensic patients were typically already known to services and in treatment at the time of their index offence, but often poorly compliant.

This study highlights the need for general services to stratify patients under their care for established violence risk factors, to monitor patients for poor compliance and to intervene promptly in order to prevent severe violent incidents in the most clinically vulnerable.

The GET UP multi-element psychosocial intervention proved to be superior to treatment as usual in improving outcomes in patients with first-episode psychosis (FEP). However, to guide treatment decisions, information on which patients may benefit more from the intervention is warranted.

To identify patients' characteristics associated with (a) a better treatment response regardless of treatment type (non-specific predictors), and (b) a better response to the specific treatment provided (moderators).

Some demographic and clinical variables were selected a priori as potential predictors/moderators of outcomes at 9 months. Outcomes were analysed in mixed-effects random regression models. (Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01436331.)

Analyses were performed on 444 patients. Education, duration of untreated psychosis, premorbid adjustment and insight predicted outcomes regardless of treatment. Only age at first contact with the services proved to be a moderator of treatment outcome (patients aged ≥35 years had greater improvement in psychopathology), thus suggesting that the intervention is beneficial to a broad array of patients with FEP.

Except for patients aged over 35 years, no specific subgroups benefit more from the multi-element psychosocial intervention, suggesting that this intervention should be recommended to all those with FEP seeking treatment in mental health services.