Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17548844›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2007

Deconstructing Psychosis conference February 2006: the validity of schizophrenia and alternative approaches to the classification of psychosis.

Judith Allardyce, Wolfgang Gaebel, Jurgen Zielasek, Jim van Os

Abstract readConference Proceedings
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. The evolution of cognitive-behavioral therapy for psychosis.Psychology research and behavior management · 2015
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Diagnostic markers for schizophrenia: do we actually know what we're looking for?World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2011
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Future classification of psychotic disorders.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2009
    Review
  15. Will the Kraepelinian dichotomy survive DSM-V?Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2009
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. The evolution of drug development in schizophrenia: past issues and future opportunities.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2008
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Judith AllardyceDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Heinrich-Heine University, Rhineland State Clinics, Germany.
Wolfgang Gaebel
Jurgen Zielasek
Jim van Os

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The DSM V planning process is currently underway and it has once again ignited the debate about the validity of the schizophrenia diagnosis. In this paper, we review the psychometric literature examining the evidence for discontinuity between schizophrenia and normality and the distinction between schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. We conclude by proposing potential alternative approaches to refining the classification of psychosis.

Indexed as

Psychotic DisordersSchizophreniaDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersEvaluation Studies as TopicHumansReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID17548844
PMCPMC2632332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.