M Konings1, M Bak, M Hanssen, J van Os, L Krabbendam. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, South Limburg Mental Health Research and Teaching Network, EURON, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: General population longitudinal cohort studies have demonstrated the prognostic validity of self-reported psychotic experiences, but data on reliability and cross-validation with interview-based measures of these experiences are sparse. This study tested the reliability and validity of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE42). METHOD: At baseline, the CAPE42 was used to measure the subclinical psychosis phenotype in a general population sample (n = 765). At follow-up (mean interval: 7.7 months), the Structured Interview for Schizotypy, Revised (SIS-R), the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), and the CAPE42 were administered (n = 510). RESULTS: Baseline self-reported dimensions of psychosis were specifically and independently associated with their equivalent interview-based dimension at follow-up (standardized effect sizes of 0.4-0.5) and with their equivalent self-reported measure (standardized effect sizes of 0.6-0.8). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that self-reported dimensions of psychotic experiences in general population samples appear to be stable, reliable and valid.
OBJECTIVE: General population longitudinal cohort studies have demonstrated the prognostic validity of self-reported psychotic experiences, but data on reliability and cross-validation with interview-based measures of these experiences are sparse. This study tested the reliability and validity of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE42). METHOD: At baseline, the CAPE42 was used to measure the subclinical psychosis phenotype in a general population sample (n = 765). At follow-up (mean interval: 7.7 months), the Structured Interview for Schizotypy, Revised (SIS-R), the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), and the CAPE42 were administered (n = 510). RESULTS: Baseline self-reported dimensions of psychosis were specifically and independently associated with their equivalent interview-based dimension at follow-up (standardized effect sizes of 0.4-0.5) and with their equivalent self-reported measure (standardized effect sizes of 0.6-0.8). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that self-reported dimensions of psychotic experiences in general population samples appear to be stable, reliable and valid.
Authors: Dina Collip; Johanna T W Wigman; Ashleigh Lin; Barnaby Nelson; Margreet Oorschot; Wilma A M Vollebergh; Jaymee Ryan; Gennedy Baksheev; Marieke Wichers; Jim van Os; Inez Myin-Germeys; Alison R Yung Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2011-09-19 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Nikie Korver; Piotr J Quee; Heleen B M Boos; Claudia J P Simons; Lieuwe de Haan Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Lian Van Der Krieke; Bertus F Jeronimus; Frank J Blaauw; Rob B K Wanders; Ando C Emerencia; Hendrika M Schenk; Stijn De Vos; Evelien Snippe; Marieke Wichers; Johanna T W Wigman; Elisabeth H Bos; Klaas J Wardenaar; Peter De Jonge Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2015-09-22 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: M D G Dominguez; Marieke Wichers; Roselind Lieb; Hans-Ulrich Wittchen; Jim van Os Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2009-05-21 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Marta de Castro-Catala; Paula Cristóbal-Narváez; Thomas R Kwapil; Tamara Sheinbaum; Elionora Peña; Neus Barrantes-Vidal; Araceli Rosa Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2016-02-24 Impact factor: 5.270
Authors: D S van Dam; N Korver-Nieberg; E Velthorst; C J Meijer; L de Haan Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 4.328