Innovations In Clinical Neuroscience

NOV-DEC 2017

A peer-reviewed, evidence-based journal for clinicians in the field of neuroscience

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 38 of 83

39 ICNS INNOVATIONS IN CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE November-December 2017 • Volume 14 • Number 11–12 O R I G I N A L R E S E A R C H predictions of multiple aspects of everyday functioning in an independent sample of people with schizophrenia by comparing expressive and experiential deficits to the PANSS NSF. APPENDIX 1 Clinical trials information. Clinical trials included in the analysis dataset are presented below. Some international studies or studies conducted prior to the year 2001 that do not have identifiers are listed as "Data on File" with the pharmaceutical company or include a link to the relevant publication in which the data were previously presented. • RIS-SCH-401 (NCT00297388) • RIS-SCP-402 (NCT00061802) • RIS-INT-2 (Peuskens J. Risperidone in the treatment of chronic schizophrenic patients: an international multi-center double blind parallel-group comparative study versus haloperidol. Jan 1992. Janssen Clinical Research Report no.: RIS-INT-2) • RIS-INT-57(NCT00558298) • 076477-SCH-305 (NCT00668837) • R076477-SCH-303 (NCT00650793) • RIS-INT-61 (NCT00558298) • RIS-INT-57 (NCT00558298) • RIS-INT-3 (Marder SR. Risperidone versus haloperidol versus placebo in the treatment of chronic schizophrenia. Nov 1991. Janssen Clinical Research Report no.: RIS-INT-3) • R076477-SCH-304 (NCT00077714) • RIS-INT-50 (Data on File: RIS-INT-50. Janssen Pharmaceutical Products, L.P., Titusville, NJ; 2000) • RIS-USA-112 (Conley RR, Mahmoud R. A randomized double-blind study of risperidone and olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(5):765–774) • RIS-USA-121 (NCT00253136) • RIS-USA-250 (NCT00378183) • RIS-USA-305 (NCT00236353) • RIS-USA-79 (NCT00253110) APPENDIX 2 Educational Testing Service DIF classification system. The ETS system for DIF classification has been in place for nearly 25 years. The ETS DIF criteria combine the Mantel- Haenszel procedure with the contrast between the Rasch-based item difficulty estimates for the different groups. As described by Zieky, 47 statistical analyses are used to designate items into three ETS DIF categories according to the direction, size, and significance of the DIF statistics. 48,49 These categories were created to "avoid identifying items that display practically trivial but statistically significant DIF." 50 The three categories are as follows: • A=negligible or nonsignificant DIF • B=slight to moderate DIF • C=moderate to large DIF. The rules currently used by the ETS to classify items as A, B, or C are based on the magnitude of the Mantel-Haenszel delta difference (MH D-DIF) statistic and its statistical significance. The Mantel-Haenszel approach 51 to DIF analysis, developed by Holland and Thayer, 52 involves the creation of "k" two-by-two tables, where k is the number of score categories on the matching criterion. 51,52 For the kth score level, the data can be summarized as follows: NF1k denote the numbers of examinees in the reference and focal groups, respectively, who answered correctly; and NR0k and NF0k are the numbers of examinees in the reference and focal groups who answered incorrectly. Nk is the total number of examinees. In developing the MH D-DIF index, Holland and Thayer 53 elected to express the statistic on the ETS delta scale of item difficulty. An MH D-DIF value of -1, for example, means that the item is estimated to be more difficult for the focal group than for the reference group by an average of one delta point, conditional on ability. 53 Expressing the amount of DIF in this way was intended to make the MH D-DIF statistic more useful for test development. Therefore, an A item is one for which either the Mantel-Haenszel (MH) chi-square statistic is not significant at the 0.05 level, or MH D-DIF is smaller than 1 in absolute value. A C item is one for which the MH D-DIF statistic is significantly greater than 1 in absolute value at the 0.05 level and has an absolute value of 1.5 or more. Items that do not meet the definition for either A or C items are considered B items. More explicitly, an item is declared a B item if it does not meet the qualifications for a C item and if 1) MH CHISQ is greater than 3.84, and 2) if |MH D-DIF| is 1 or greater. REFERENCES 1. Blanchard JJ, Cohen AS. The structure of negative symptoms within schizophrenia: implications for assessment. Schizophr Bull. 2006;32(2):238–245. 2. Kirkpatrick B, Fenton WS, Carpenter WT, Marder SR. The NIMH-MATRICS consensus statement on negative symptoms. Schizophr Bull. 2006;32(2):214–219. 3. Messinger JW, Trémeau F, Antonius D, et al. Avolition and expressive deficits capture negative symptom phenomenology: implications for DSM-5 and schizophrenia research. Clin Psychol Rev. 2011;31(1):161–168. 4. Strauss GP, Keller WR, Buchanan RW, et al. Next-generation negative symptom assessment for clinical trials: validation of the brief negative symptom scale. Schizophr Res. 2012;142(1- 3):88–92. 5. Kring AM, Gur RE, Blanchard JJ, et al. The clinical assessment interview for negative symptoms (CAINS): final development and validation. Am J Psychiatry. 2013;170(2):165–172. 6. Galderisi S, Bucci P, Mucci A, et al. Categorical and dimensional approaches to negative symptoms of schizophrenia: focus on long-term stability and functional outcome. Schizophr Res. 2013;147(1):157–162. 7. Lyne J, Renwick L, Madigan K, et al. Do psychosis prodrome onset negative symptoms predict first presentation negative symptoms? Eur Psychiatry. 2014;29(3):153–159. 8. Quinlan T, Roesch S, Granholm E. The role of dysfunctional attitudes in models of negative symptoms and functioning in schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 2014;157(1-3):182–189. 9. Green MF, Bearden CE, Cannon TD, et al. Social cognition in schizophrenia, part 1: performance across phase of illness. Schizophr Bull. 2012;38(4):854–864. 10. Rassovsky Y, Horan WP, Lee J, et al. Pathways between early visual processing and functional outcome in schizophrenia. Psychol Med. 2011;241(3):487–497. 11. Ventura J, Subotnik KL, Gitlin MJ, et al. Negative symptoms and functioning during the first year after a recent onset of schizophrenia and eight years later. Schizophr Res. 2015;161(2-3):407–413. 12. Schlosser DA, Campellone TR, Biagianti B, et al. Modeling the role of negative symptoms in determining social functioning in individuals at clinical high risk of psychosis. Schizophr Res. 2015;169(1-3):204–208. 13. Llerena K, Reddy LF, Kern RS. The role of experiential and expressive negative symptoms on

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Innovations In Clinical Neuroscience - NOV-DEC 2017