Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29471331›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2018

Cross Cultural Validation and Extension of the Clinical Assessment Interview for Negative Symptoms (CAINS) in the Chinese Context: Evidence from a Spectrum Perspective.

Dong-Jie Xie, Hai-Song Shi, Simon S Y Lui, Chuan Shi, Ying Li, Karen K Y Ho, Karen S Y Hung, Wen-Xiu Li, Zheng-Hui Yi, Eric F C Cheung and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. EPA guidance on assessment of negative symptoms in schizophrenia.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Bridge centrality network structure of negative symptoms in people with schizophrenia.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2023
    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

12 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Dong-Jie XieNeuropsychology and Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, CAS Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Beijing, China.
Hai-Song ShiNeuropsychology and Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, CAS Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Beijing, China.
Simon S Y LuiNeuropsychology and Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, CAS Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Beijing, China.
Chuan ShiPeking University Sixth Hospital, Beijing, China.
Ying LiNeuropsychology and Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, CAS Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Beijing, China.
Karen K Y HoCastle Peak Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Karen S Y HungCastle Peak Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Wen-Xiu LiHaidian District Mental Health Prevent-Treatment Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zheng-Hui YiShanghai Mental Health Centre, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Eric F C CheungCastle Peak Hospital, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Ann M KringDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Raymond C K ChanNeuropsychology and Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, CAS Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Beijing, China.
Castle Peak Hospital · CNBeijing Haidian Hospital · CNUniversity of Chinese Academy of Sciences · CNNorth China Electric Power University · CNPeking University Sixth Hospital · CNShanghai Jiao Tong University · CNUniversity of California, Berkeley · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Clinical Assessment Interview for Negative Symptoms (CAINS) was designed in accordance with the recent theory and research in social affective neuroscience and to address the psychometric and conceptual limitations of other instruments assessing negative symptoms. The present study aimed to provide a large-scale validation of the CAINS in China and examine its applicability and validity evidence across the schizophrenia spectrum. Using confirmatory factor analysis, our results replicated the original findings in the US development samples that the CAINS possesses a stable 2-factor structure, namely "motivation/pleasure" and "expression". We also found significant correlations between the CAINS and other negative symptom measures. The CAINS demonstrated good discriminant validity in differentiating negative symptoms in people with schizophrenia, nonpsychotic first-degree relatives and people with social anhedonia. People with schizophrenia exhibited significantly higher CAINS subscale scores than first-degree relatives and healthy controls. In addition, first-degree relatives had higher "motivation/pleasure" scores than healthy controls. The "motivation/pleasure" subscale scores of individuals with social anhedonia were also significantly higher than healthy controls.

Indexed as

AdultAnhedoniaChinaCross-Cultural ComparisonFemaleHumansInterview, PsychologicalMaleMiddle AgedPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSchizophreniaSchizotypal Personality Disorder

Identifiers

PMID29471331
PMCPMC6188520
OpenAlexW2794117788

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.