ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2008
The predictive validity of the Leonhardean classification of endogenous psychoses: a 21-33-year follow-up of a prospective study ("BUDAPEST 2000").
Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence of Catatonia and Its Moderators in Clinical Samples: Results from a Meta-analysis and Meta-regression Analysis.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2018Pooled it
- A neuropsychological study on Leonhard's nosological system.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2022Article
- Wernicke-Kleist-Leonhard phenotypes of endogenous psychoses: a review of their validity .Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To our knowledge, no previous long-term studies of the Leonhardean classification in the whole spectrum of endogenous psychoses have been conducted. This prospective study (n = 276; female patients n = 222; normal control persons n = 54) started in 1967-1976. The same population was followed-up by participation of a "blinded control" psychiatrist in 1997-2002 [patients available at follow-up = 125 (56.3%); available controls = 38 (70.4%)]. Patients for this investigation were selected by two independent diagnosticians from eight nosological groups based on full diagnostic agreement. Diagnostic agreement at follow-up (weighted-kappa) was 0.87. Predictive validity of the diagnostic categories was measured empirically and using a stochastic (Markovian) model, thus combining validity and reliability. Hebephrenias, group of normal persons and of schizophrenias proved to be valid categories, with diagnostic stabilities of 0.94, 0.91, and 0.93, for the three groups, respectively. In addition, bipolar manic-depressive psychoses and cycloid psychoses were also valid (diagnostic stability of 0.77 and 0.76, respectively). Unipolar depression was valid (diagnostic stability = 0.84) only by forming a "nosological family" based on diagnostic stability and on current status and clinical presentation during the period preceding the follow-up with regard to other mood-congruent disorders and outcome-diagnosis "normal control". Validity of systematic paraphrenias (diagnostic stability = 0.69) was in the moderate range. Division of schizophrenias in "systematic versus non-systematic" nosological categories was inconclusive; the categories of affect-laden paraphrenia, periodic catatonia and systematic catatonias could not be confirmed reliably in this study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18299789What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.