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

By R. Wallwork, Rebecca G. Fortgang, Ryota Hashimoto, Daniel R. Weinberger, D. Dickinson. Schizophrenia Research, 2012

802 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Psychiatry and Mental health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a9669f44bfa9774a147cdcfc6d7f305088615297

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. R. Keefe
2. R. McCutcheon
3. Philip K. McGuire

In Psychiatry and Mental health

1. R. Keefe
2. R. McCutcheon

Citations in the corpus

• Cognitive impairment in schizophrenia: aetiology, pathophysiology, and treatment (2023, methodology): “…analyses of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) indicate that a fi ve-factor model (positive, negative, disorganised, excited, and depressed) captures the symptom structure of schizophrenia better than the original a priori grouping of positive, negative, and general symptoms [6, 7].”