ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022
Testing the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the Staden schizophrenia anxiety rating scale.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cerebellar gray matter volume difference in first-episode bipolar and unipolar depression.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Enhancing outcomes in type 2 diabetes: the role of psychological interventions within multidisciplinary rehabilitation care.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Arabic translation and validation of the clinician administered Staden schizophrenia anxiety rating scale (S-SARS).Heliyon · 2024Article
- Prevalence and influencing factors of sleep disorders in medical students after the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate assessment of anxiety disorders and their symptomatology in schizophrenic patients is important for prognosis and treatment. Measuring anxiety on the traditional anxiety assessment scales such as the Hamilton Anxiety Rating (HAMA) Scale or the self-rating depression scale (SAS) is challenging and often considered unsuitable for assessing anxiety symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. The Staden schizophrenia anxiety rating scale (S-SARS) has been shown to reliably measure specified and undifferentiated anxiety in schizophrenia. The present study aims to test the reliability and validity of the S-SARS version, thereby facilitating Chinese psychiatrists in assessing anxiety symptoms in schizophrenic patients. A total of 300 patients meeting ICD-10 diagnostic criteria of schizophrenia were recruited by convenience sampling. We used the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to evaluate the structural validity of S-SARS and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to acquire the cutoff point of S-SARS to define the severity of anxiety. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's and Krippendorff's α scores. 1-week test-retest reliability was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Correlation analysis with HAMA was used to determine the Chinese version of S-SARS criterion validity. We have the following results: Our version of S-SARS showed Cronbach's α score as 0.899, Krippendorff's α as 0.874, and a correlation coefficient of 0.852 between S-SARS and HAMA. The EPA demonstrated that the contribution rate of major factors was 69.45%. All the items of S-SARS were located in one factor and showed a high factor load (0.415-0.837). The correlation coefficient of S-SARS and HAMA was 0.852. Our results indicated that Chinese version of S-SARS showed good constructive validity and reliability. It also showed better criterion validity compared to HAMA. The S-SARS and its Chinese version can thus serve as an effective tool for assessing anxiety symptoms in patients with schizophrenia.
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.