测量挪威语版精神病症状评定量表(PSYRATS)和阳性与阴性综合征量表(PANSS)中阳性量表的并发有效性。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-21 DOI:10.1080/08039488.2024.2367638
Olivia Schjøtt-Pedersen, Helen Christine Bull, Erik Falkum, Torill Ueland, Oda Skancke Gjerdalen, Vegard Øksendal Haaland, Stig Evensen, June Ullevoldsæter Lystad
{"title":"测量挪威语版精神病症状评定量表(PSYRATS)和阳性与阴性综合征量表(PANSS)中阳性量表的并发有效性。","authors":"Olivia Schjøtt-Pedersen, Helen Christine Bull, Erik Falkum, Torill Ueland, Oda Skancke Gjerdalen, Vegard Øksendal Haaland, Stig Evensen, June Ullevoldsæter Lystad","doi":"10.1080/08039488.2024.2367638","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) is one of the most commonly used assessment tools for measuring psychotic symptoms. The Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales (PSYRATS) is another instrument created specifically to assess delusions and auditory hallucinations. However, research on the concurrent validity of PSYRATS with PANSS is limited. There are also inconsistent findings regarding the association between the PSYRATS scales and the PANSS positive scale. The present study aims to add to the understanding of the concurrent validity of these measures, while also incorporating a broader measure of psychiatric symptoms (the symptom scale from the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale - split version, GAF-S).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Spearman's Rank Order Correlations (rho) were calculated for scores from the PANSS positive scale, PSYRATS and GAF-S in a sample of 148 participants with psychotic disorders at three time points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings indicate concurrent validity between PSYRATS and PANSS, while the PSYRATS scales were not consistently correlated with GAF-S.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PSYRATS may be a valid assessment tool for evaluating psychotic symptoms. The utility of PSYRATS in research and clinical practice should be investigated further.</p>","PeriodicalId":19201,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"548-551"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring the concurrent validity of the norwegian versions of the psychotic symptom rating scales (PSYRATS) and the positive scale from the positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS).\",\"authors\":\"Olivia Schjøtt-Pedersen, Helen Christine Bull, Erik Falkum, Torill Ueland, Oda Skancke Gjerdalen, Vegard Øksendal Haaland, Stig Evensen, June Ullevoldsæter Lystad\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08039488.2024.2367638\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) is one of the most commonly used assessment tools for measuring psychotic symptoms. The Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales (PSYRATS) is another instrument created specifically to assess delusions and auditory hallucinations. However, research on the concurrent validity of PSYRATS with PANSS is limited. There are also inconsistent findings regarding the association between the PSYRATS scales and the PANSS positive scale. The present study aims to add to the understanding of the concurrent validity of these measures, while also incorporating a broader measure of psychiatric symptoms (the symptom scale from the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale - split version, GAF-S).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Spearman's Rank Order Correlations (rho) were calculated for scores from the PANSS positive scale, PSYRATS and GAF-S in a sample of 148 participants with psychotic disorders at three time points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings indicate concurrent validity between PSYRATS and PANSS, while the PSYRATS scales were not consistently correlated with GAF-S.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PSYRATS may be a valid assessment tool for evaluating psychotic symptoms. The utility of PSYRATS in research and clinical practice should be investigated further.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nordic Journal of Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"548-551\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nordic Journal of Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08039488.2024.2367638\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08039488.2024.2367638","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:积极与消极综合征量表(PANSS)是测量精神病症状最常用的评估工具之一。精神病症状评定量表(PSYRATS)是另一种专门用于评估妄想和幻听的工具。然而,有关 PSYRATS 与 PANSS 的并发有效性的研究十分有限。有关 PSYRATS 量表与 PANSS 阳性量表之间关联的研究结果也不一致。本研究旨在进一步了解这些量表的并发有效性,同时纳入更广泛的精神症状量表(全球功能评估量表--分裂版,GAF-S的症状量表):对 148 名精神病患者在三个时间点的 PANSS 阳性量表、PSYRATS 和 GAF-S 的得分计算斯皮尔曼等级相关性(rho):结果:研究结果表明 PSYRATS 和 PANSS 具有并发有效性,而 PSYRATS 量表与 GAF-S 的相关性并不一致:结论:PSYRATS 可能是评估精神病症状的有效评估工具。应进一步研究 PSYRATS 在研究和临床实践中的实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Measuring the concurrent validity of the norwegian versions of the psychotic symptom rating scales (PSYRATS) and the positive scale from the positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS).

Purpose: The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) is one of the most commonly used assessment tools for measuring psychotic symptoms. The Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales (PSYRATS) is another instrument created specifically to assess delusions and auditory hallucinations. However, research on the concurrent validity of PSYRATS with PANSS is limited. There are also inconsistent findings regarding the association between the PSYRATS scales and the PANSS positive scale. The present study aims to add to the understanding of the concurrent validity of these measures, while also incorporating a broader measure of psychiatric symptoms (the symptom scale from the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale - split version, GAF-S).

Materials and methods: Spearman's Rank Order Correlations (rho) were calculated for scores from the PANSS positive scale, PSYRATS and GAF-S in a sample of 148 participants with psychotic disorders at three time points.

Results: The findings indicate concurrent validity between PSYRATS and PANSS, while the PSYRATS scales were not consistently correlated with GAF-S.

Conclusions: PSYRATS may be a valid assessment tool for evaluating psychotic symptoms. The utility of PSYRATS in research and clinical practice should be investigated further.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry
Nordic Journal of Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
86
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Nordic Journal of Psychiatry publishes international research on all areas of psychiatry. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry is the official journal for the eight psychiatry associations in the Nordic and Baltic countries. The journal aims to provide a leading international forum for high quality research on all themes of psychiatry including: Child psychiatry Adult psychiatry Psychotherapy Pharmacotherapy Social psychiatry Psychosomatic medicine Nordic Journal of Psychiatry accepts original research articles, review articles, brief reports, editorials and letters to the editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信