Decision tree case study: early onset schizophrenia guide
Three decision points, and at each one the paper has to explain a gap — what you expected the decision to achieve versus what it actually produced. That comparison is the assignment, not the diagnosis.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 10, 2026
What does the Carrie decision tree assignment actually assess?
The structure of this assignment is unusual and worth reading precisely, because the repeated four-part question at each decision point is where the marks are. For each decision you must say which option you chose, why, what you hoped to achieve, and explain any difference between what you expected and the results, and why they were different. That last clause is the one students skip, and it is the only part of the paper that cannot be written from a textbook. When a decision produces something you did not anticipate — a psychological battery that cannot confirm the diagnosis, a parent who refuses the medication — the explanation of the gap is the clinical reasoning the assignment exists to assess. The instruction to consider co-morbid physical as well as mental factors sits in the same sentence as the decision points for a reason: in a 13-year-old with new psychotic symptoms, the physical differential is not an afterthought and the paper should show it being carried through all three decisions rather than mentioned once.
Decision one is a differential and the three options are close together for a reason. Early-onset schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and schizotypal personality disorder share odd beliefs, social withdrawal and constricted affect; they are separated by the presence and timing of mood episodes, by whether psychotic symptoms occur outside those episodes, and by whether the picture is a pervasive personality pattern rather than an episodic illness. The brief tells you to link specific symptoms in the case to DSM-5 criteria, so quote the case detail — the half-cat friends, the voices "in her head", the academic decline on entering high school, the developmental lag — and attach each to a criterion. Two things also have to be excluded before any of the three is defensible: a medical cause and a substance-induced psychosis. The pediatrician's clean bill of health is not the same as a workup, and saying what you would still order is what the case's own prompt about additional diagnostic tests is asking for.
Be careful about how you use the guidance text supplied with the case, because it is teaching material and not a rubric. It notes that there are no psychometric tests specific to schizophrenia, which is precisely why decision two's outcome is a partial one: the battery characterises cognition and rules things out without confirming anything. If you chose the referral, your expectation-versus-result paragraph writes itself. If you would have chosen differently, say so and defend it — the paper asks for your reasoning about the decision that was made, not for agreement with it. What the battery does give you is genuinely useful and worth naming: a cognitive profile, an assessment of how far the academic decline is attributable to illness rather than ability, and documentation that will matter for the educational planning the case implies. Framing a partial result as informative rather than as a failure is itself the clinical point.
Decision three is a treatment choice under real constraints, and the constraints are in the case rather than in the literature. Carrie is 13, so most agents are off-label at her age; her parents have said they do not want her turned into a "zombie", which is a stated objection to sedation and extrapyramidal effects rather than to medication in principle; and any antipsychotic commits you to metabolic monitoring — fasting glucose, weight and BMI, blood pressure, fasting lipids — at baseline and on follow-up. That monitoring is a real-world weak point rather than a formality: a population study found fewer than a quarter of children starting an antipsychotic received baseline testing, and follow-up rates fell to around one in eight by three months. Committing in writing to a monitoring schedule is a strong, checkable part of the plan.
The non-pharmacological half of the plan is where most papers under-deliver, and the evidence is unusually clear. Family intervention reduces relapse in schizophrenia, and a network meta-analysis of ninety trials found family psychoeducation alone, without behavioural or skills training, outperforming the more elaborate models. Given parents who are frightened and resistant, that is not a footnote — it is arguably the highest-yield intervention available at decision three, and naming the evidence for it converts a generic "involve the family" line into a defended choice. The educational side matters too, since the case tells you her academic demands rose and her teachers wanted her held back. A treatment plan for a 13-year-old that says nothing about school has left out the setting where most of her functional impairment is actually happening, and where any improvement will first be visible.
The ethics paragraph the brief asks for should be about this case rather than about principles. The salient issues are concrete: a 13-year-old's assent alongside parental consent, off-label prescribing and what has to be disclosed about it, the parents' expressed fear of sedation and how you address it without either dismissing or capitulating, and confidentiality when a minor tells you something in the room her parents have not heard. Support your rationale with at least three academic resources, and note the brief's exclusion — the course text may support your reasoning but does not count toward that minimum. Attach the citations to the decisions rather than collecting them at the end, since each decision point asks you to support your response with evidence, and a reference list detached from the reasoning satisfies the letter of that instruction and none of its intent.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Separate three closely related psychotic-spectrum diagnoses by criterion rather than by impression.
- 02Account for the gap between an expected and an actual clinical outcome.
- 03Weigh off-label prescribing in a minor against a family's stated objection.
- 04Commit to a metabolic monitoring schedule as part of a prescribing decision.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question
Important information for writing discussion questions and participation Hi Class, Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts. Contact me if you have any questions. Important information on Writing a Discussion Question Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references) There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article. Include in-text citations in your response Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information Follow APA-7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week. Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references) Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count. Follow APA 7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points. Here are some helpful links Student paper example Citing Sources The Writing Center is a great resource Welcome to class Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to. I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you. Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted. If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations. Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements. Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week. I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course!
What each decision point must contain
- 01A write-up covering three decision points for Case 3.
- 02For each: which decision was selected, why, what you hoped to achieve, and why the result differed from the expectation.
- 03Specific case symptoms linked to DSM-5 criteria to support the diagnosis.
- 04Additional diagnostic tests you would perform.
- 05Consideration of co-morbid physical as well as mental factors.
- 06Ethical considerations affecting the treatment plan and communication with the client and family.
- 07A minimum of three academic resources, not counting the course text.
Working the three decision points in order
Decision one: differential diagnosis
Choose between early-onset schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and schizotypal personality disorder by matching case detail to criteria, and specify the workup still needed.
Decision two: psychotherapy and assessment plan
Justify the referral or alternative, state what you expected it to yield, and explain why the result was partial.
Decision three: psychopharmacology
Select an agent with attention to age, off-label status and the family's stated objection, and commit to a monitoring schedule.
Ethical considerations and family communication
Address assent and consent, disclosure of off-label use, confidentiality with a minor, and how the family's fears are handled.
Where the paediatric psychosis evidence is
Recommended databases
- PubMed Central
- DSM-5-TR
- American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry practice parameters
- Stahl's Prescriber's Guide for agent-level detail
Search sequence
- 1.Read the AACAP practice parameter for schizophrenia in children and adolescents before choosing an agent; it sets the standard your decision will be measured against.
- 2.Search specifically for antipsychotic metabolic monitoring in children rather than in adults, because the guidance and the adherence data are both paediatric.
- 3.Look for family intervention evidence in psychosis rather than for psychotherapy in general; the effect sizes are much larger and the brief's guidance text points there.
- 4.Check the FDA labelling age for any agent you propose, so the off-label discussion is accurate rather than assumed.
Sources for diagnosis, monitoring and family work
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with schizophrenia
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · 2013
The AACAP standard for assessment and treatment in this age group, including the combination of antipsychotic medication with psychoeducational, psychotherapeutic and educational intervention. Cite it for the treatment architecture; check current labelling separately, since drug approvals have moved since 2013.
- 02
Adherence to antipsychotic laboratory monitoring guidelines in children and youth: a population-based study
Frontiers in Psychiatry · 2023
Population data showing only 23.5% of children starting an antipsychotic received baseline metabolic testing, falling to around 13% at three months. Use it to argue that a written monitoring schedule is a substantive part of the plan rather than boilerplate.
- 03
Family interventions for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
The Lancet Psychiatry · 2022
Ninety trials and 10,340 participants, with family psychoeducation alone outperforming more complex models. The evidence for making family work a named intervention at decision two rather than an aside. Note it is an adult-weighted evidence base, so say so when applying it to a 13-year-old.
- 04
Schizoaffective Disorder
StatPearls Publishing, via NCBI Bookshelf · 2025
Full-text criteria and differential for the diagnosis that sits closest to early-onset schizophrenia in this case. Read the section separating mood-episode-bound psychosis from psychosis occurring independently; that boundary is what decision one turns on.
Before you submit
Common mistakes
- Skipping the expectation-versus-result explanation, which is the only genuinely analytic part of each decision point.
- Naming a diagnosis without linking case detail to individual DSM-5 criteria.
- Failing to exclude medical and substance-induced causes before settling on a psychiatric diagnosis.
- Treating the pediatrician's clean bill of health as an adequate workup.
- Ignoring the parents' stated objection to sedation when choosing an agent.
- Prescribing without committing to a metabolic monitoring schedule.
- Reducing the psychotherapy decision to generic supportive therapy when family intervention has the stronger relapse evidence.
- Writing the ethics section as the four principles rather than as the decisions this case forces.
- Counting the course text toward the three-resource minimum, which the brief excludes.
Submission checklist
- All three decision points are addressed with all four required elements.
- At least three case-specific symptoms are matched to named DSM-5 criteria.
- The two rejected diagnoses are excluded with stated reasons.
- Additional diagnostic tests are specified, including medical workup and substance screening.
- The prescribing rationale addresses off-label status at age 13.
- A baseline and follow-up metabolic monitoring plan is stated.
- Family intervention appears with evidence rather than as a courtesy.
- Ethical considerations name assent, disclosure and confidentiality in this case.
- At least three academic resources are cited, excluding the course text.
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.