BACKGROUND: The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) is a widely used instrument to measure severe psychopathology in schizophrenia. Recently, its widely accepted 5-factor solution is questioned using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). This article examines the appropriateness of applying CFA to PANSS data and the dimensionality of the PANSS in a large sample of persons with chronic schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, and schizoaffective disorder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data reduction was conducted on PANSS baseline assessments from 2 multicenter clinical trials consisting of 1284 persons' available PANSS data at baseline and Week 8. Supplementary analyses were conducted for separate trials and for noncompleters at baseline (n = 1872). RESULTS: Examination of the data indicated that the statistical requirements of CFA (eg, multivariate normality) were not met by the data. Multidimensional scaling and a scree plot of principal components superimposed on simulated random data converged to indicate that 5 dimensions are generally a parsimonious fit to the PANSS at baseline, whereas 4 dimensions emerged after 8 weeks of treatment. The components included negative symptoms, positive symptoms, disorganized (baseline only), anxiety/depression, and excited. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate realistic alternatives to CFA when studying the PANSS, support a 5-component model of PANSS ratings at baseline, and indicate that the structure of symptoms change after 8 weeks of treatment. These results seem to be robust because they generally replicate within trials for completers and at baseline for the entire sample.
BACKGROUND: The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) is a widely used instrument to measure severe psychopathology in schizophrenia. Recently, its widely accepted 5-factor solution is questioned using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). This article examines the appropriateness of applying CFA to PANSS data and the dimensionality of the PANSS in a large sample of persons with chronic schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, and schizoaffective disorder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data reduction was conducted on PANSS baseline assessments from 2 multicenter clinical trials consisting of 1284 persons' available PANSS data at baseline and Week 8. Supplementary analyses were conducted for separate trials and for noncompleters at baseline (n = 1872). RESULTS: Examination of the data indicated that the statistical requirements of CFA (eg, multivariate normality) were not met by the data. Multidimensional scaling and a scree plot of principal components superimposed on simulated random data converged to indicate that 5 dimensions are generally a parsimonious fit to the PANSS at baseline, whereas 4 dimensions emerged after 8 weeks of treatment. The components included negative symptoms, positive symptoms, disorganized (baseline only), anxiety/depression, and excited. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate realistic alternatives to CFA when studying the PANSS, support a 5-component model of PANSS ratings at baseline, and indicate that the structure of symptoms change after 8 weeks of treatment. These results seem to be robust because they generally replicate within trials for completers and at baseline for the entire sample.
Authors: Emilio Fernandez-Egea; Clemente García-Rizo; Brian Miller; Eduard Parellada; Azucena Justicia; Miguel Bernardo; Brian Kirkpatrick Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2011-09-23 Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Todd S Woodward; Kwanghee Jung; Geoffrey N Smith; Heungsun Hwang; Alasdair M Barr; Ric M Procyshyn; Sean W Flynn; Mark van der Gaag; William G Honer Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 5.270
Authors: Megan A Perrin; Pamela D Butler; Joanna DiCostanzo; Gina Forchelli; Gail Silipo; Daniel C Javitt Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2010-07-08 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Jan Stochl; Peter B Jones; James Plaistow; Ulrich Reininghaus; Stefan Priebe; Jesus Perez; Tim J Croudace Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2014-01-21 Impact factor: 4.035