The two most used semi-structured psychometric instruments that define criteria for being at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis are the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS) and the Structured Interview for Psychosis-Risk Syndromes (SIPS). Although very similar there are important differences between these two measures. Developing harmonized psychometric criteria for defining CHR and associated outcomes would be beneficial for future research. This article describes the first step in this process by reporting on a NIMH workshop held in Washington DC, in February 2019 that was attended by experts in the field. The aim of this workshop was to examine the similarities and differences between the two measures and consider how the harmonization process could proceed.
Keywords: CAARMS; SIPS; assessment; clinical high risk; harmonization; ultra‐high risk.
© 2023 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.