Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21767349›Full record

SynthesisBMC psychiatry2011

Is the PANSS used correctly? a systematic review.

Michael Obermeier, Rebecca Schennach-Wolff, Sebastian Meyer, Hans-Jürgen Möller, Michael Riedel, Daniela Krause, Florian Seemüller

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06856161 (A Novel Blood Test as a Differential Diagnosis and Drug Efficacy Biomarker in Mental Health), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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.

NCT06856161 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

A Novel Blood Test as a Differential Diagnosis and Drug Efficacy Biomarker in Mental Health

TypeobservationalSponsorFraser HealthRan2025 to 2027Enrolled500ConditionsDepression - Major Depressive Disorder, Schizophenia Disorder, Psychosis, Mania (Neurotic)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. EPA guidance on assessment of negative symptoms in schizophrenia.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Linking PANSS negative symptom scores with the Clinical Global Impressions Scale: understanding negative symptom scores in schizophrenia.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2019
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Influence of ANKK1 and DRD2 polymorphisms in response to haloperidol.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2013
    Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Michael ObermeierDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Nussbaumstrasse 7, Munich, Germany. Michael.Obermeier@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Rebecca Schennach-Wolff
Sebastian Meyer
Hans-Jürgen Möller
Michael Riedel
Daniela Krause
Florian Seemüller

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe PANSS (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale) is one of the most important rating instruments for patients with schizophrenia. Nevertheless, there is a long and ongoing debate in the psychiatric community regarding its mathematical properties.All 30 items range from 1 to 7 leading to a minimum total score of 30, implying that the PANSS is an interval scale. For such interval scales straightforward calculation of relative changes is not appropriate. To calculate outcome criteria based on a percent change as, e.g., the widely accepted response criterion, the scale has to be transformed into a ratio scale beforehand. Recent publications have already pointed out the pitfall that ignoring the scale level (interval vs. ratio scale) leads to a set of mathematical problems, potentially resulting in erroneous results concerning the efficacy of the treatment.

methodsA Pubmed search based on the PRISMA statement of the highest-ranked psychiatric journals (search terms "PANSS" and "response") was carried out. All articles containing percent changes were included and methods of percent change calculation were analysed.

resultsThis systematic literature research shows that the majority of authors (62%) actually appear to use incorrect calculations. In most instances the method of calculation was not described in the manuscript.

conclusionsThese alarming results underline the need for standardized procedures for PANSS calculations.

Indexed as

HumansPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesSchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID21767349
PMCPMC3146924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.