Towards a Standard Psychometric Diagnostic Interview for Subjects at Ultra High Risk of Psychosis: CAARMS versus SIPS

Table 2

Psychosis threshold: similarities and differences between the SIPS 5.0 and the CAARMS 12/2006.

	Presence of psychotic syndrome; SIPS version 5.0	Psychosis threshold; CAARMS version 12/2006
Inclusion criteria	Severity score of 6 on at least one of P1–P5; PLUS; Frequency score of 3 on P1, P2, P3, P4, and/or P5	Severity score of 6 on at least one of P1, P2, and P4 and/or 5-6 on P3; PLUS; Frequency score of 4–6 on P1, P2, P3, and/or P4
Urgency	Symptoms are seriously disorganizing and dangerous (a)	—

CAARMS, Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States; SIPS, Structured Interview for Psychosis-Risk Syndrome.
(a) “‘Dangerous’ is taken to mean physically dangerous, for example, risk of death or serious physical injury, and ‘disorganizing’ means potentially psychosocially dangerous, for example, risk of seriously damaging work relations, social relations, family relations, or personal dignity.” Personal communication from the authors of the SIPS, published with permission (see Acknowledgments).