4.7 Article

Evaluation of the factor structure of symptoms in patients with schizophrenia

Journal

PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH
Volume 197, Issue 3, Pages 285-289

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2011.10.006

Keywords

Factor structure; Five-factor model; PANSS; Principal component analysis; Schizophrenia

Categories

Funding

  1. Korea Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF) [2010-0022796]
  2. Gachon University Gil Hospital Research Fund
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2010-0022796] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Considering the widespread use of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and its factors around the world in clinical trials, it is clearly necessary to perform a transcultural validation of the factor structure of the PANSS. The purpose of the present study was to examine the PANSS factor structure in a Korean sample of subjects with schizophrenia. A total of 150 outpatients were assessed using the PANSS and other clinical rating scales. Principal component analyses revealed five factors. i.e., negative, cognitive/disorganization, positive, excitement, and depression/anxiety dimensions, which accounted for 64.1% of the total variance. All five factors showed good internal consistency, suggesting that the reliability of the factors extracted was adequate. Significant correlations were found between the five components of the PANSS and the corresponding clinical rating scales. The results of the present study indicate that the five-factor model best fit the data from our patients and that it was validated transculturally. The factor structures should be further validated using various neurobiological methods to ultimately help in clarifying the heterogeneity and pathogenesis of symptomatology in schizophrenia. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available