{"page":"https://casescribe.ai/explorer/conditions/psychosis","generated_at":"2026-10-03T18:33:52.160Z","data_as_of":{"decisions":944125,"first_year":2017,"last_year":2026,"latest_decision":"2026-04-30","cfr":"2026-10-01","m21":"2026-09-29"},"about":{"publisher":"CaseScribe AI (VA Law Explorer)","source":"Public Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions (appeals of VA decisions, not VA's first decisions), M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual, 38 CFR Parts 3 and 4.","method":"Outcomes are issue-level: each condition the Board decided in a decision counts once. Decision data is extracted by AI and can contain errors. Rates describe past appeals and do not predict any claim.","disclaimer":"For research only. CaseScribe AI is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. Verify figures against the source decisions and regulations.","attribution":"Cite as: VA Law Explorer, CaseScribe AI, with the page URL."},"data":{"condition":"Psychosis","all_conditions_granted_pct":19.4,"decisions":8723,"years":"2017-2026","granted_pct":11,"denied_pct":22.8,"remanded_pct":63.9,"granted_on_merits_pct":32.5,"by_year":[{"year":2017,"issues":934,"granted_pct":11,"denied_pct":33.9,"remanded_pct":48.9},{"year":2018,"issues":1686,"granted_pct":12.6,"denied_pct":23,"remanded_pct":61.3},{"year":2019,"issues":1391,"granted_pct":11.5,"denied_pct":21.9,"remanded_pct":64.4},{"year":2020,"issues":849,"granted_pct":9.1,"denied_pct":21.9,"remanded_pct":66.7},{"year":2021,"issues":711,"granted_pct":8,"denied_pct":23.3,"remanded_pct":67.4},{"year":2022,"issues":781,"granted_pct":5.8,"denied_pct":16.5,"remanded_pct":76.4},{"year":2023,"issues":865,"granted_pct":8.6,"denied_pct":19,"remanded_pct":70.9},{"year":2024,"issues":734,"granted_pct":12.9,"denied_pct":19.3,"remanded_pct":66.2},{"year":2025,"issues":639,"granted_pct":15.6,"denied_pct":24.7,"remanded_pct":57.3},{"year":2026,"issues":233,"granted_pct":18,"denied_pct":23.2,"remanded_pct":55.4}],"benefit_of_doubt_in_grants_pct":75.9,"evidence_on_merits":[{"evidence":"va_exam_favorable","decisions_with":675,"granted_pct_with":71.2,"granted_pct_without":26},{"evidence":"va_exam_unfavorable","decisions_with":5439,"granted_pct_with":27.5,"granted_pct_without":48.8},{"evidence":"nexus_positive","decisions_with":1069,"granted_pct_with":75.9,"granted_pct_without":21},{"evidence":"nexus_negative","decisions_with":3689,"granted_pct_with":26.8,"granted_pct_without":38.9},{"evidence":"private_opinion","decisions_with":2361,"granted_pct_with":46,"granted_pct_without":25.4},{"evidence":"treating_physician","decisions_with":504,"granted_pct_with":52.2,"granted_pct_without":30.9},{"evidence":"lay_statement","decisions_with":6967,"granted_pct_with":30.3,"granted_pct_without":50.2},{"evidence":"buddy_statement","decisions_with":362,"granted_pct_with":57.4,"granted_pct_without":31.6},{"evidence":"combat_service","decisions_with":702,"granted_pct_with":45.5,"granted_pct_without":31.2}],"top_reasons":{"granted":[{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":105},{"reason":"continuity of symptomatology since service","decisions":26},{"reason":"new and material evidence received to reopen claim","decisions":11},{"reason":"new and material evidence submitted","decisions":10},{"reason":"new and material evidence submitted to reopen claim","decisions":9},{"reason":"presumption of soundness not rebutted","decisions":8}],"denied":[{"reason":"no current diagnosis","decisions":288},{"reason":"preponderance of the evidence against the claim","decisions":242},{"reason":"va examiner: less likely than not related to service","decisions":171},{"reason":"service records negative or silent","decisions":169},{"reason":"no in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis","decisions":133},{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":74}]},"recent_examples":{"granted":[{"case_id":"A26039054","year":2026,"judge":"JENNIFER HWA","rationale":"Favorable finding of current psychiatric disorder by AOJ; Conflicting opinions from private and VA examiners; VA opinion deemed conclusory and lacking adequate rationale; Private opinion found more probative due to detailed reasoning; Benefit of the doubt applied to resolve approximate balance of ev… [truncated, 6 chars omitted]"},{"case_id":"A26037696","year":2026,"judge":"JENNIFER HWA","rationale":"Total occupational and social impairment; Persistent danger of hurting self; Gross impairment in thought processes or communication"},{"case_id":"A26037332","year":2026,"judge":"B. D. WATSON","rationale":"Persuasive weight of the evidence weighs in favor of finding that the Veteran's mental health condition was causally related to service.; Benefit of all reasonable doubt given to the Veteran."}],"denied":[{"case_id":"A26040060","year":2026,"judge":"C. CRAWFORD","rationale":"No current diagnosis of acquired psychiatric disorder; Absence of supporting service treatment records for counseling; Preponderance of evidence weighs against claim"},{"case_id":"A26040132","year":2026,"judge":"MARTIN B. PETERS","rationale":"No current psychiatric diagnosis; Not incurred in or resulting from service"},{"case_id":"A26039290","year":2026,"judge":"MARCUS N. FULTON","rationale":"STRs negative for mental disorder; Lay testimony not competent for etiology; No pre-decisional duty to assist error"}]},"how_va_rates":null,"rules":[]}}