ArticlePsychiatry investigation2020
Validation of the Korean Version of the 15-Item Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences in a College Population.
Article in Psychiatry investigation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
- Validation of the Arabic Language Version of the Shortest Form of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE-9) in a Young Adult Population-Based Sample.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Validation of the Korean Version of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences in General Population.Psychiatry investigation · 2023Article
- Mindlink: A stigma-free youth-friendly community-based early-intervention centre in Korea.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences-15 item positive scale (CAPE-15) in college students.
methodsThis study had two stages: initial screening with self-report questionnaires including the CAPE-15, and semi-structured interviews to investigate the instrument's diagnostic validity. The initial screening involved 1,749 college students. The modified Korean version of Prodromal Questionnaire-16 item (mKPQ-16) was also administered. The criteria for ultra-high risk (UHR) of psychosis in the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS) were the gold standard for diagnosis.
resultsTwelve of the interviewed subjects met the CAARMS criteria for UHR of psychosis. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was highest (0.936) for the CAPE-15 distress score (p<0.001). The use of 6 as the cutoff for the CAPE-15 distress score resulted in the best balance of sensitivity (91.7%) and specificity (85.2%), with a favorable positive predictive value of 32.4%. The coefficients of correlation between the CAPE-15 and mKPQ-16 were significant.
conclusionThe Korean version of the CAPE-15 is a good instrument for screening for psychosis risk in collegiate settings. The validation of this scale could contribute to the early identification of psychosis in the Korean community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.