Searching for a consensus five-factor model of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for schizophrenia

R. S. Wallwork; R. Fortgang; R. Hashimoto; D. R. Weinberger; D. Dickinson

doi:10.1016/j.schres.2012.01.031

Searching for a consensus five-factor model of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for schizophrenia

R. S. Wallwork, R. Fortgang, R. Hashimoto, D. R. Weinberger, D. Dickinson

School of Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

396 Scopus citations

Abstract

Although the developers of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) grouped items into three subscales, factor analyses indicate that a five-factor model better characterizes PANSS data. However, lack of consensus on which model to use limits the comparability of PANSS variables across studies. We counted "votes" from published factor analyses to derive consensus models. One of these combined superior fit in our Caucasian sample (n. =. 458, CFI. =. .970), and in distinct Japanese sample (n. =. 164, CFI. =. .964), relative to the original three-subscale model, with a sorting of items into factors that was highly consistent across the studies reviewed.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	246-250
Number of pages	5
Journal	Schizophrenia Research
Volume	137
Issue number	1-3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2012.01.031
State	Published - May 2012

Keywords

Cognition
PANSS
Schizophrenia
Symptoms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Psychiatry and Mental health
Biological Psychiatry

Access to Document

10.1016/j.schres.2012.01.031

Cite this

@article{a3b452e59b4a4715834e5fd3672fdfc6,

title = "Searching for a consensus five-factor model of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for schizophrenia",

abstract = "Although the developers of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) grouped items into three subscales, factor analyses indicate that a five-factor model better characterizes PANSS data. However, lack of consensus on which model to use limits the comparability of PANSS variables across studies. We counted {"}votes{"} from published factor analyses to derive consensus models. One of these combined superior fit in our Caucasian sample (n. =. 458, CFI. =. .970), and in distinct Japanese sample (n. =. 164, CFI. =. .964), relative to the original three-subscale model, with a sorting of items into factors that was highly consistent across the studies reviewed.",

keywords = "Cognition, PANSS, Schizophrenia, Symptoms",

author = "Wallwork, {R. S.} and R. Fortgang and R. Hashimoto and Weinberger, {D. R.} and D. Dickinson",

note = "Funding Information: Funding for this study was provided by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Mental Health ; the NIMH IRP had no further role in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication. ",

year = "2012",

month = may,

doi = "10.1016/j.schres.2012.01.031",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "137",

pages = "246--250",

journal = "Schizophrenia Research",

issn = "0920-9964",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "1-3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Searching for a consensus five-factor model of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for schizophrenia

AU - Wallwork, R. S.

AU - Fortgang, R.

AU - Hashimoto, R.

AU - Weinberger, D. R.

AU - Dickinson, D.

N1 - Funding Information: Funding for this study was provided by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Mental Health ; the NIMH IRP had no further role in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication.

PY - 2012/5

Y1 - 2012/5

N2 - Although the developers of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) grouped items into three subscales, factor analyses indicate that a five-factor model better characterizes PANSS data. However, lack of consensus on which model to use limits the comparability of PANSS variables across studies. We counted "votes" from published factor analyses to derive consensus models. One of these combined superior fit in our Caucasian sample (n. =. 458, CFI. =. .970), and in distinct Japanese sample (n. =. 164, CFI. =. .964), relative to the original three-subscale model, with a sorting of items into factors that was highly consistent across the studies reviewed.

AB - Although the developers of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) grouped items into three subscales, factor analyses indicate that a five-factor model better characterizes PANSS data. However, lack of consensus on which model to use limits the comparability of PANSS variables across studies. We counted "votes" from published factor analyses to derive consensus models. One of these combined superior fit in our Caucasian sample (n. =. 458, CFI. =. .970), and in distinct Japanese sample (n. =. 164, CFI. =. .964), relative to the original three-subscale model, with a sorting of items into factors that was highly consistent across the studies reviewed.

KW - Cognition

KW - PANSS

KW - Schizophrenia

KW - Symptoms

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84860839624&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84860839624&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.schres.2012.01.031

DO - 10.1016/j.schres.2012.01.031

M3 - Article

C2 - 22356801

AN - SCOPUS:84860839624

SN - 0920-9964

VL - 137

SP - 246

EP - 250

JO - Schizophrenia Research

JF - Schizophrenia Research

IS - 1-3

ER -

Searching for a consensus five-factor model of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for schizophrenia

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this