Resilience research has documented the ability to cope with traumatic and stressful situations and/or retain functioning given certain risk factors in the context of psychosis. In this study, we conducted the first systematic review of the literature on psychosis-like experiences (PLEs) and resilience. Fifteen articles (from 11 unique study samples) from 10 countries were included in this systematic review, with a total of 11,937 unique study participants. Inclusion criteria were broad, capturing a wide range of individuals with PLEs who have not yet experienced threshold psychosis, such as individuals in the general population with elevated self-reports of PLEs, as well as clinical groups diagnosed by clinician interviews (i.e., clinical or ultra-high-risk for psychosis [CHR or UHR]). For this review, studies needed to include research aims and empirical research related to resilience, and use an established or author-defined measure of psychological and/or social resilience. Data reporting quality was assessed with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and place of residence, race/ethnicity/culture/language, occupation, gender/sex, religion, education, socioeconomic status, social capital (PROGRESS) guidelines. Study aims and measurement of key variables varied widely, and all studies were cross-sectional. In 73% of the studies, resilience was inversely associated with PLEs or psychosis risk status (e.g., CHR or UHR). Results related to specific resilience subscales were mixed. Author-defined resilience was typically related to internal/ psychological resources. Future research, particularly longitudinal research involving multidimensional measurement of resilience (e.g., internal and external factors), along with well-defined theoretical models, are necessary before drawing firm conclusions on resilience and PLEs.
- Clinical-high-risk for psychosis
- Psychosis-like experiences