↓ Skip to main content

Subscale structure for the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS): A proposed solution focused on clinical validity

Overview of attention for article published in Psychiatry Research, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Subscale structure for the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS): A proposed solution focused on clinical validity
Published in
Psychiatry Research, September 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.psychres.2012.08.019
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Although the items of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) are ordinal, continuous data methods are consistently used to analyze them. The current study addresses this issue by applying a categorical method and critically examining the ideas of item inclusion and goodness of fit. Data from 1527 subjects were used to test a proposed solution to the factor structure of the PANSS using a categorical factor analytic method. The model was made more generalizable by setting a minimum level of association between the item and the factor, and the results were then compared to existing solutions. The model was also tested for consistency in a first-episode sample. Use of categorical methods indicated similar results to previous analyses; however, it is demonstrated that the strength of the estimates can be unstable when items are shared across factors. The current study demonstrates that solutions can change substantially when a model is over-fitted, and therefore use of measures of fit as the criterion for an acceptable model can mask important relationships and decrease clinical validity.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 1%
Unknown 66 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 24%
Neuroscience 8 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 17 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2012.
All research outputs
#21,592,555
of 26,505,350 outputs
Outputs from Psychiatry Research
#6,058
of 7,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,611
of 189,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychiatry Research
#122
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,505,350 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,772 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 189,013 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.