Loading…

Subtyping schizophrenia: A comparison of positive/negative and system-specific approaches

Abstract Background Schizophrenia is a heterogeneous disorder. Over the years, different approaches have been proposed to approach this heterogeneity by categorizing symptom patterns. The study aimed to compare positive/negative and system-specific approaches to subtyping. Methods We used the Positi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Comprehensive psychiatry 2015-08, Vol.61, p.115-121
Main Authors: Lang, F.U, Walther, S, Stegmayer, K, Anderson-Schmidt, H, Schulze, T.G, Becker, T, Jäger, M
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-2892701ad734ad1fabab55f6769e60d684c8ef17abce07082356360678e010523
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-2892701ad734ad1fabab55f6769e60d684c8ef17abce07082356360678e010523
container_end_page 121
container_issue
container_start_page 115
container_title Comprehensive psychiatry
container_volume 61
creator Lang, F.U
Walther, S
Stegmayer, K
Anderson-Schmidt, H
Schulze, T.G
Becker, T
Jäger, M
description Abstract Background Schizophrenia is a heterogeneous disorder. Over the years, different approaches have been proposed to approach this heterogeneity by categorizing symptom patterns. The study aimed to compare positive/negative and system-specific approaches to subtyping. Methods We used the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Bern Psychopathology Scale (BPS), which consists of subscales for three domains (language, affect and motor behavior) that are hypothesized to be related to specific brain circuits, to assess cross-sectional psychopathological characteristics in a sample of 100 inpatients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. We then categorized participants into positive/negative and system-specific subgroups to allow comparisons of the two approaches. Results The analyses revealed correlations between the PANSS positive subscore and the BPS affective subscore ( r = .446, p < .001) and between the PANSS negative subscore and the BPS motor behavior subscore ( r = .227, p = .023). As regards the positive and negative subtype, more participants were classified as positive in the language-dominant subtype (30.3%) and affect-dominant subtype (30.3%), whereas more were classified as negative in the motor behavior-dominant subtype (44.4%). However, most patients met the criteria for the mixed subtype. Conclusions The results suggest that the positive/negative and system-specific approaches can be regarded as complementary. Future studies should examine both approaches in a longitudinal assessment of psychopathological symptoms and link them with qualitative-phenomenological approaches.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.comppsych.2015.05.014
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1746881010</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0010440X15000899</els_id><sourcerecordid>3738538241</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-2892701ad734ad1fabab55f6769e60d684c8ef17abce07082356360678e010523</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkk9v1DAQxS0EokvhK0AkLr1kO3Zsx-GAtKr4J1XiUJDgZDnOpOsliYOdVAqfHqdbitQLSCPZh9-8p5k3hLyisKVA5flha30_jnGx-y0DKraQivJHZENFwXJVKP6YbAAo5JzDtxPyLMYDACil-FNywiQFzgu6Id-v5npaRjdcZ9Hu3S8_7gMOzrzJdtlqYYKLfsh8m40-usnd4PmA12b9ZGZosrjECfs8jmhd62xmxjF4Y_cYn5Mnrekivrh7T8nX9---XHzMLz9_-HSxu8ytEOWUM1WxEqhpyoKbhramNrUQrSxlhRIaqbhV2NLS1BahBMUKIQsJslSYphOsOCVnR91k_HPGOOneRYtdZwb0c9S05FKptDX4NyorUQolgSb09QP04OcwpEFuKWCU3VLlkbLBxxiw1WNwvQmLpqDXoPRB3wel16A0pKI8db6805_rHpv7vj_JJGB3BDDt7sZh0NE6HCw2LqCddOPdf5i8faBhOzc4a7ofuGD8O5GOTIO-Wu9lPRcq1lOpquI3-la84A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1695021201</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Subtyping schizophrenia: A comparison of positive/negative and system-specific approaches</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals</source><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Lang, F.U ; Walther, S ; Stegmayer, K ; Anderson-Schmidt, H ; Schulze, T.G ; Becker, T ; Jäger, M</creator><creatorcontrib>Lang, F.U ; Walther, S ; Stegmayer, K ; Anderson-Schmidt, H ; Schulze, T.G ; Becker, T ; Jäger, M</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background Schizophrenia is a heterogeneous disorder. Over the years, different approaches have been proposed to approach this heterogeneity by categorizing symptom patterns. The study aimed to compare positive/negative and system-specific approaches to subtyping. Methods We used the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Bern Psychopathology Scale (BPS), which consists of subscales for three domains (language, affect and motor behavior) that are hypothesized to be related to specific brain circuits, to assess cross-sectional psychopathological characteristics in a sample of 100 inpatients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. We then categorized participants into positive/negative and system-specific subgroups to allow comparisons of the two approaches. Results The analyses revealed correlations between the PANSS positive subscore and the BPS affective subscore ( r = .446, p &lt; .001) and between the PANSS negative subscore and the BPS motor behavior subscore ( r = .227, p = .023). As regards the positive and negative subtype, more participants were classified as positive in the language-dominant subtype (30.3%) and affect-dominant subtype (30.3%), whereas more were classified as negative in the motor behavior-dominant subtype (44.4%). However, most patients met the criteria for the mixed subtype. Conclusions The results suggest that the positive/negative and system-specific approaches can be regarded as complementary. Future studies should examine both approaches in a longitudinal assessment of psychopathological symptoms and link them with qualitative-phenomenological approaches.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-440X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-8384</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2015.05.014</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26104431</identifier><identifier>CODEN: COPYAV</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Behavior ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Female ; Humans ; Illnesses ; Language ; Male ; Neurobiology ; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales ; Psychiatry ; Psychopathology ; Schizophrenia ; Schizophrenia - classification ; Schizophrenia - diagnosis ; Schizophrenic Psychology ; Studies ; Symptom Assessment</subject><ispartof>Comprehensive psychiatry, 2015-08, Vol.61, p.115-121</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2015 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Aug 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-2892701ad734ad1fabab55f6769e60d684c8ef17abce07082356360678e010523</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-2892701ad734ad1fabab55f6769e60d684c8ef17abce07082356360678e010523</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2325-0403</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1695021201/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1695021201?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3535,25732,27903,27904,36991,36992,44569,45759,74872</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26104431$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lang, F.U</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walther, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stegmayer, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson-Schmidt, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schulze, T.G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becker, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jäger, M</creatorcontrib><title>Subtyping schizophrenia: A comparison of positive/negative and system-specific approaches</title><title>Comprehensive psychiatry</title><addtitle>Compr Psychiatry</addtitle><description>Abstract Background Schizophrenia is a heterogeneous disorder. Over the years, different approaches have been proposed to approach this heterogeneity by categorizing symptom patterns. The study aimed to compare positive/negative and system-specific approaches to subtyping. Methods We used the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Bern Psychopathology Scale (BPS), which consists of subscales for three domains (language, affect and motor behavior) that are hypothesized to be related to specific brain circuits, to assess cross-sectional psychopathological characteristics in a sample of 100 inpatients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. We then categorized participants into positive/negative and system-specific subgroups to allow comparisons of the two approaches. Results The analyses revealed correlations between the PANSS positive subscore and the BPS affective subscore ( r = .446, p &lt; .001) and between the PANSS negative subscore and the BPS motor behavior subscore ( r = .227, p = .023). As regards the positive and negative subtype, more participants were classified as positive in the language-dominant subtype (30.3%) and affect-dominant subtype (30.3%), whereas more were classified as negative in the motor behavior-dominant subtype (44.4%). However, most patients met the criteria for the mixed subtype. Conclusions The results suggest that the positive/negative and system-specific approaches can be regarded as complementary. Future studies should examine both approaches in a longitudinal assessment of psychopathological symptoms and link them with qualitative-phenomenological approaches.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Illnesses</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Neurobiology</subject><subject>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</subject><subject>Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychopathology</subject><subject>Schizophrenia</subject><subject>Schizophrenia - classification</subject><subject>Schizophrenia - diagnosis</subject><subject>Schizophrenic Psychology</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Symptom Assessment</subject><issn>0010-440X</issn><issn>1532-8384</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkk9v1DAQxS0EokvhK0AkLr1kO3Zsx-GAtKr4J1XiUJDgZDnOpOsliYOdVAqfHqdbitQLSCPZh9-8p5k3hLyisKVA5flha30_jnGx-y0DKraQivJHZENFwXJVKP6YbAAo5JzDtxPyLMYDACil-FNywiQFzgu6Id-v5npaRjdcZ9Hu3S8_7gMOzrzJdtlqYYKLfsh8m40-usnd4PmA12b9ZGZosrjECfs8jmhd62xmxjF4Y_cYn5Mnrekivrh7T8nX9---XHzMLz9_-HSxu8ytEOWUM1WxEqhpyoKbhramNrUQrSxlhRIaqbhV2NLS1BahBMUKIQsJslSYphOsOCVnR91k_HPGOOneRYtdZwb0c9S05FKptDX4NyorUQolgSb09QP04OcwpEFuKWCU3VLlkbLBxxiw1WNwvQmLpqDXoPRB3wel16A0pKI8db6805_rHpv7vj_JJGB3BDDt7sZh0NE6HCw2LqCddOPdf5i8faBhOzc4a7ofuGD8O5GOTIO-Wu9lPRcq1lOpquI3-la84A</recordid><startdate>20150801</startdate><enddate>20150801</enddate><creator>Lang, F.U</creator><creator>Walther, S</creator><creator>Stegmayer, K</creator><creator>Anderson-Schmidt, H</creator><creator>Schulze, T.G</creator><creator>Becker, T</creator><creator>Jäger, M</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2325-0403</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20150801</creationdate><title>Subtyping schizophrenia: A comparison of positive/negative and system-specific approaches</title><author>Lang, F.U ; Walther, S ; Stegmayer, K ; Anderson-Schmidt, H ; Schulze, T.G ; Becker, T ; Jäger, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-2892701ad734ad1fabab55f6769e60d684c8ef17abce07082356360678e010523</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Illnesses</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Neurobiology</topic><topic>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</topic><topic>Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychopathology</topic><topic>Schizophrenia</topic><topic>Schizophrenia - classification</topic><topic>Schizophrenia - diagnosis</topic><topic>Schizophrenic Psychology</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Symptom Assessment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lang, F.U</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walther, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stegmayer, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson-Schmidt, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schulze, T.G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becker, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jäger, M</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Databases</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Comprehensive psychiatry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lang, F.U</au><au>Walther, S</au><au>Stegmayer, K</au><au>Anderson-Schmidt, H</au><au>Schulze, T.G</au><au>Becker, T</au><au>Jäger, M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Subtyping schizophrenia: A comparison of positive/negative and system-specific approaches</atitle><jtitle>Comprehensive psychiatry</jtitle><addtitle>Compr Psychiatry</addtitle><date>2015-08-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>61</volume><spage>115</spage><epage>121</epage><pages>115-121</pages><issn>0010-440X</issn><eissn>1532-8384</eissn><coden>COPYAV</coden><abstract>Abstract Background Schizophrenia is a heterogeneous disorder. Over the years, different approaches have been proposed to approach this heterogeneity by categorizing symptom patterns. The study aimed to compare positive/negative and system-specific approaches to subtyping. Methods We used the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Bern Psychopathology Scale (BPS), which consists of subscales for three domains (language, affect and motor behavior) that are hypothesized to be related to specific brain circuits, to assess cross-sectional psychopathological characteristics in a sample of 100 inpatients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. We then categorized participants into positive/negative and system-specific subgroups to allow comparisons of the two approaches. Results The analyses revealed correlations between the PANSS positive subscore and the BPS affective subscore ( r = .446, p &lt; .001) and between the PANSS negative subscore and the BPS motor behavior subscore ( r = .227, p = .023). As regards the positive and negative subtype, more participants were classified as positive in the language-dominant subtype (30.3%) and affect-dominant subtype (30.3%), whereas more were classified as negative in the motor behavior-dominant subtype (44.4%). However, most patients met the criteria for the mixed subtype. Conclusions The results suggest that the positive/negative and system-specific approaches can be regarded as complementary. Future studies should examine both approaches in a longitudinal assessment of psychopathological symptoms and link them with qualitative-phenomenological approaches.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>26104431</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.comppsych.2015.05.014</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2325-0403</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0010-440X
ispartof Comprehensive psychiatry, 2015-08, Vol.61, p.115-121
issn 0010-440X
1532-8384
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1746881010
source Publicly Available Content Database; ScienceDirect Journals; Elsevier
subjects Adult
Behavior
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Humans
Illnesses
Language
Male
Neurobiology
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
Psychiatry
Psychopathology
Schizophrenia
Schizophrenia - classification
Schizophrenia - diagnosis
Schizophrenic Psychology
Studies
Symptom Assessment
title Subtyping schizophrenia: A comparison of positive/negative and system-specific approaches
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T01%3A21%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Subtyping%20schizophrenia:%20A%20comparison%20of%20positive/negative%20and%20system-specific%20approaches&rft.jtitle=Comprehensive%20psychiatry&rft.au=Lang,%20F.U&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=61&rft.spage=115&rft.epage=121&rft.pages=115-121&rft.issn=0010-440X&rft.eissn=1532-8384&rft.coden=COPYAV&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.comppsych.2015.05.014&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3738538241%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-2892701ad734ad1fabab55f6769e60d684c8ef17abce07082356360678e010523%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1695021201&rft_id=info:pmid/26104431&rfr_iscdi=true