↓ Skip to main content

Could PANSS be a useful tool in the determining of the stages of schizophrenia? A clinically operational approach

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Psychiatric Research, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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.
Title
Could PANSS be a useful tool in the determining of the stages of schizophrenia? A clinically operational approach
Published in
Journal of Psychiatric Research, November 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2016.11.013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena Dragioti, Tobias Wiklund, Melina Siamouli, Katerina Moutou, Konstantinos N. Fountoulakis

Abstract

Staging in schizophrenia might be an important approach for the better treatment and rehabilitation of patients. The purpose of this study was to empirically devise a staging approach in a sample of stabilized patients with schizophrenia. One hundred and seventy patients aged ≥18 years (mean = 40.7, SD = 11.6) diagnosed by DSM-5 criteria were evaluated with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Principal components analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation was used. The model was examined in the total sample and separately across a hypothesized stage of illness based on three age groups and between the two sexes. The PCA revealed a six factor structure for the total sample: 1) Negative, 2) Positive, 3) Depression and anxiety, 4) Excitement and Hostility, 5) Neurocognition and 6) Disorganization. The separate PCAs by stage of illness and sex revealed different patterns and quality of symptomatology. The Negative and Positive factors were stable across all examined groups. The models corresponding to different stages differed mainly in terms of neurocognition and disorganization and their interplay. Catatonic features appear more prominent in males while in females neurocognition takes two forms; one with disorganization and one with stereotype thinking with delusions. This study suggests that the three arbitrary defined stages of illness (on the basis of age) seem to reflect a progress from a preserved insight and more coherent mental functioning to disorganization and eventually neurocognitive impairment. Sexes differ in terms of the relationship of psychotic features with neurocognition. These results might have significant research and clinical implications.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 24%
Student > Master 5 20%
Researcher 5 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 16%
Unspecified 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 32%
Psychology 8 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 16%
Unspecified 3 12%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 1 4%

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 13 September 2017.
All research outputs
#9,031,963
of 11,761,635 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Psychiatric Research
#1,446
of 1,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,507
of 327,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Psychiatric Research
#42
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,761,635 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,906 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 327,149 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.