An interventional study of Cognitive Behavioural Virtual Reality Therapy. and Traditional Cognitive Behavioural Therapy in Paranoid Schizophrenia, Schizophrenia and Related Disorders and Schizophrenia Prodromal, sponsored by Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Denmark. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-12.
Sponsored by Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The study is a randomised, assessor-blinded parallel-groups superiority clinical trial fulfilling the CONSORT criteria for non-pharmacological treatment. A total of 256 patients will be allocated to either Cognitive Behavioural Virtual Reality Therapy plus treatment as usual, versus traditional CBT for psychosis plus treatment as usual. All participants will be assessed at baseline and 3- and 9 months post baseline. A stratified block-randomisation with concealed randomisation sequence will be conducted. Independent assessors blinded to the treatment will evaluate outcome. Analysis of outcome will be carried out with the intention to treat principles.
Ideas of reference and ideas of persecution are among the most frequent symptoms in psychotic disorders, and they hinder patients in conducting daily activities such as leaving the home or using public transportation - as well as inflicting immensely on their quality of life. The social avoidance caused by these symptoms does not improve with antipsychotic mediation. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for psychosis has demonstrated beneficial effect on psychotic symptoms, but the average effect sizes are in the small to moderate range, and training and resource requirements mean that, in practice, therapy is not delivered to all those who might benefit. Hence, there is considerable interest in the development of novel therapies that draw on the principles of cognitive behavioural therapy for psychosis, but which are shorter, more effective, and are capable of being delivered by a wider workforce. Augmenting CBT with virtual reality exposure has the possibility of creating artificial experiences in real time, that make the user feel immersed and able to interact as if it was the real world. Additionally, virtual reality therapy allows for personalization of the therapy to match the specific social challenges of each patient. Preliminary findings suggest virtual reality exposure to lead to faster symptom reduction than traditional therapy. While the potential beneficial effects of virtual reality exposure to psychotic, and sub-threshold psychotic symptoms, such as ideas of reference and ideas of persecution, are evident and virtual reality therapies are promising in general, the research field is in an urgent need of evidence on the effectiveness of virtual reality therapy in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The proposed trial is hitherto the largest trial in the world to evaluate the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural virtual reality therapy (CBT-VR) compared to traditional CBT. The investigators expect to find CBT-VR to be more beneficial in reducing ideas of reference and ideas of persecution in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Additionally, the investigators expect it to result in improved depressive, anxiety-, and negative symptoms, as well as improved social cognition and psychosocial functioning and quality of life in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The target group in the trial also encompass patients with schizotypal disorder (often young adults), showing subthreshold psychotic symptoms (e.g. ideas of reference), that are at increased risk of developing manifest psychosis. The CBT-VR may show efficacy in preventing progression to an overt psychotic state in these patients. Hence, there is a great potential for CBT-VR in the treatment of patients with psychosis and sub-threshold psychosis, but studies are needed to establish evidence for the treatment. If the results of the current trial are positive, the manualised treatment can easily be implemented in clinical practise.
Note:
When the trial was initiated, the original primary outcome was ideas of persecution, measured with part B in Green Paranoid Thought Scale (GPTS) while ideas of social reference, measured with part A in Green Paranoid Thought Scale, was listed as a secondary outcome in the trial protocol, here on Clinicaltrials.gov and in the approval from the Committee on Health Research Ethics of the Capital Region Denmark.
During our trial, our impressions in the clinical assessments were, that ideas of social reference seem to be a more appropriate primary outcome due to our population including people diagnosed with schizotypal disorders along with participants with manifest psychotic disorders.
We observed that participants with schizotypal disorders experiencing ideas of social reference, that are more attenuated paranoid ideations, would often receive a low score on the GPTS part B. Therefore, listing GPTS part B as primary outcome would hypothetically only reflect the symptom level of part of the study population (patients with manifest psychosis), while not fully comprising the symptom level, and potential for change, found in the population of patients with schizotypal disorder. ''
As of February, 23 2022, 10 months into the trial, where 79 participants out of 256 were included and had participated in baseline assessments, we decided after thorough consideration to exchange our primary outcome, GPTS part B, ideas of persecution, with our secondary outcome, GPTS part A, ideas of social reference, as this was intended to capture the symptom level in the total study population.
The exchange did not affect participation in our trial or the informed consent. Intervention in both groups and measurements were unchanged. The two outcomes constitute together GPTS and the unifying concept we attempt to treat, namely paranoid ideations. As this is a blinded, methodologically sound trial, we had not (and still have not throughout the study period) access to preliminary data and therefore no knowledge of the distribution of our two intervention groups nor the potential effect of the intervention.
The power calculation remains unchanged irrespective of the selection of primary outcome. (Ideas of persecution: relevant difference 6.0, SD 17.9, N=128*2, power= 80%). Due to the notions mentioned above, we did not find any reasons for ethical implications of the change of primary outcome - as we also were fully transparent with this change of outcome here on Clinicaltrials.gov.
We therefore assumed that our ethical committee would approve of this change. However, on September 3 2022 we received a rejection from the Committee on Health Research Ethics of the Capital Region Denmark on changing outcomes, on the invariable grounds that the trial is commenced. This means that it is necessary to keep ideas of persecution, part B in Green Paranoid Thought Scale, as our primary outcome and keep ideas of social reference, part A in Green Paranoid Thought Scale as a secondary outcome.
A design paper was published while we had ideas of social reference, part A in Green Paranoid Thought Scale, as a primary outcome. An Update, informing about this significant change in the form of changing back to the originally, approved, primary outcome, has been published.
3,563 studies on the registry are indexed under Schizophrenia; 491 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 259 is above the median of 71 across 2,944 interventional studies indexed under Schizophrenia.
Browse Schizophrenia studies →Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital is the lead sponsor of 19 studies on the registry; 7 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
The CBT-VR consists of traditional CBT with the augmentation of virtual reality exposure. The virtual reality exposure comprises four virtual social environments (a bus, café, street, and supermarket). These are daily social situations that generally elicit paranoid thinking in patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder. While virtually engaging in these distressing situations, the therapist will facilitate a CBT dialogue aimed at generating alternative (i.e. non-threatening) thinking, diminishing safety behaviours (e.g. social isolation), and building up new coping strategies. This is expected to alleviate distress, anxiety, and improve daily social functioning. Preliminary findings reveal this virtual reality program to be well-tolerated and highly effective in reducing paranoia and anxiety in psychosis. Patients will be offered 10 individual sessions.
Other: Cognitive Behavioural Virtual Reality Therapy.
The treatment in the CBT group will follow the core principles of CBT used for psychotic disorders. The CBT treatment facilitates an individualised, problem-oriented approach, and uses key CBT techniques such as developing a problem and goal list, normalising psychotic-like experiences, evaluation of appraisals, and removing or diminishing safety behaviour. Patients will be offered 10 individual sessions.
Other: Traditional Cognitive Behavioural Therapy
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy augmented with Virtual Reality.
Traditional Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for psychosis.
(GPTS) Green Paranoid Thought Scale Part B: Ideas of persecution.
The primary outcome is level of ideas of persecution measured with Green Paranoid Thought Scale at cessation of treatment at 3-months. The Green Paranoid Thought Scale has displayed good reliability and validity in patients with psychosis, displaying paranoid, persecutory delusions, and has also been used in patients at-risk for psychosis showing subthreshold psychotic symptoms. Minimum total score: 32. Maximum total score: 160. Part A (Ideas of social reference) minimum score: 16 and maximum score: 80. Part B (ideas of persecution) minimum score 16 and maximum score: 80. Part B score = or \> 45 are assumed to be threshold for development of persecutory delusion. Higher score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 3 months from inclusion
SIAS (Social Interaction Anxiety Scale)
Minimum score: 0 Maximum score: 20\*4=80. Item 5,9 and 11 have reverse score. Higher score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
SBQ (Safety Behaviour Questionnaire)
Minimum score: 0. Maximum score is in theory unlimited depending on the number of identified, specific safety behaviours.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
PSP (Personal and Social Performance Scale)
Minimum score: 1 Maximum score: 100. Higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
CANTAB ERT (Emotion Recognition Task)
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
(GPTS) Green Paranoid Thought Scale Part A: Ideas of social reference
Minimum total score: 32. Maximum total score: 160. Part A (Ideas of social reference) minimum score: 16 and maximum score: 80. Part B (Ideas of persecution) minimum score 16 and maximum score: 80. Part B score = or \> 45 are assumed to be threshold for development of delusion. Higher score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
(GPTS) Green Paranoid Thought Scale Part B: Ideas of persecution
Minimum total score: 32. Maximum total score: 160. Part A (Ideas of social reference) minimum score: 16 and maximum score: 80. Part B (Ideas of persecution) minimum score 16 and maximum score: 80. Part B score = or \> 45 are assumed to be threshold for development of delusion. Higher score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 9 months from inclusion
CDSS (Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia)
Minimum score: 0 Maximum score: 9\*3 = 27. Higher score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
BNSS (Brief Negative Symptom Scale)
13 items with a score from minimum 0 to maximum 6 for each item. Higher score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
COGDIS (Cognitive disturbances scale)
Score of 0-6 indicate a range. Minimum score: 0 Maximum score: 9\*6 = 54. Higher score means worse outcome. Trait phenomenons are coded with a "7", unknown degree of severly is coded with a "8" and uncertainty whether the symptom is present is coded with a "9".
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
SAPS (Scale for the Assesment of Positive symptoms)
Composite total score: Minimum score: 0 Maximum score: 30\*5 = 150. Higher score means worse outcome. Global score: Minimum score: 0 Maximum score: 4\*5 = 20. Higher score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
Trustworthiness Scale
Minimum score: -3\*42=-126 Maximun score: +3\*42=126. Higher positive score means better outcome. Higher negative score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
DACOBS (Davos Assessment of the Cognitive Biases Scale)
Total score: Minimum score: 1\*42=42. Maximum score:7\*42=294. Higher score means worse outcome. Subscales of: Jumping to conclusions bias: Item 3+8+16+18+25+30 Belief Inflexibility bias: Item 13+15+26+34+38+41 Attention for Threat bias: Item 1+2+6+10+20+37 External Attribution bias: Item 7+12+17+22+24+29 Social Cognition problems: Item 4+9+11+14+19+39 Subjective Cognitive problems: Item 5+21+28+32+36+40 Safety behaviors: Item 23+27+31+33+35+42
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
SIDAS (Suicidal Ideation Attributes Scale)
Minimum score: 0. Maximum score: 50. Item 2 has a reverse score. Higher score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
BCSS (The Brief Core Schema Scales: Beliefs about self and others)
Items with negative belief of self and others: Minimum score: 0. Maximum score: 2\*6\*4= 48. Higher score means worse outcome. Items with Positive belief of self and others: Minimum score: 0. Maximum score: 2\*6\*4= 48. Higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
SSPA (Social Skills Performance Assessment)
Scene I: Minimum score: 1\*8=8. Maximum score: 5\*8:40. Higher score means better outcome. Scene II: Minimum score: 1\*9=9. Maximum score: 5\*9:45. Higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
TALE (Trauma And Life Events checklist)
Time frame: Baseline measure
IBT (Intentionality Bias Task)
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
(R-GPTS) Revised Green Paranoid Thought Scale
Minimum total score: 0. Maximum total score: 4\*18=72. Part A (Ideas of social reference) minimum score: 0 and maximum score: 4\*8=32. Part B (Ideas of persecution) minimum score 0 and maximum score: 4\*10=40. Part B score = or \> 18 are assumed to be threshold for development of delusion. Higher score means worse outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
GSE (General Self Efficacy Scale)
Minimum score: 1\*10=10. Maximum score: 4\*10=40. Higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
Big-5 (personality traits)
5 spectrums of personality traits assessed with 5 items each. Minimum score for each personality trait: Minimum score: 1\*5=5. Maximum score: 5\*5=25 Certain items have reverse scores.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
EQ-5D-5L (EuroQOL five dimensions questionnaire)
Scoring the descriptive system: Minimum score: 1-1-1-1-1. Maximum score: 5-5-5-5-5. Higher score means worse outcome. Scoring the VAS: Minimum score: 0. Maximum score: 100. Higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
WHO (World Health Organization 5)
Minimum score: 0. Maximum score: 5\*5\*4=100. Higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
CSQ (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire)
Time frame: 3 months follow-up
SFS (The Social Functioning Scale)
Minimum raw score: 0. Maximum raw score: 15+9+39+45+66+39+19=223. Higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: 3 and 9 months from inclusion
Plan to share: No
This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital