Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19165526›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2009

Creating a map of psychiatric patients based on psychopathological symptom profiles.

Samy Egli, Michael Riedel, Hans-Jürgen Möller, Anton Strauss, Damian Läge

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

5 authors.

Samy EgliInstitute of Psychology, Applied Cognitive Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmühlestrasse 14/28, Zurich 8050, Switzerland.
Michael Riedel
Hans-Jürgen Möller
Anton Strauss
Damian Läge

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the current debate about the categorical or dimensional classification of mental disorders many fruitful methods to illustrate one or the other aspect are employed, and suggestions are made to combine the two perspectives.

methodsWe present such an approach to combine both perspectives at the same time. Based on psychopathological AMDP-symptom profiles, a map of psychiatric patients was calculated by robust nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS).

resultsThe sample from the Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munich included the records of patients, who were admitted and discharged in 2002 and 2003 with a diagnosis of either paranoid schizophrenia, (F20.00, N = 24), bipolar affective disorder, current episode manic without psychotic symptoms (F31.1, N = 32) or severe depressive episode without psychotic symptoms (F32.2, N = 78). In the resulting map of patients we found a clear categorical distinction according to the diagnostic groups, but also high regression values of AMDP-syndromes (manic syndrome: r = 0.83, depressive syndrome: r = 0.68, and paranoid-hallucinatory syndrome, r = 0.62). DISCUSSION: The map of psychiatric patients presents an approach to consider the categorical and dimensional aspects at the same time. We were able to identify meaningful delineations between diagnostic clusters as well as continuous transitions. This method allows the whole psychopathological profile of each individual patient to be considered and also to identify misdiagnosed cases at a glance.

Indexed as

PsychopathologyBipolar DisorderDepressive DisorderDiagnosis, DifferentialDiagnostic ErrorsHospitalsHumansPatientsPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesRegression AnalysisSchizophrenia, ParanoidSeverity of Illness Index

Identifiers

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.