ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2024
Development and Evaluation of a Cognitive Battery for People With Schizophrenia in Ethiopia.
Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cognitive remediation therapy in low-and-middle-income countries (LAMICs) for people with psychosis: a systematic review of its efficacy on functional and cognitive outcomes.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy of mental health screening tools applicable to adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- The Ethiopian Cognitive Assessment battery in Schizophrenia (ECAS): a validation study.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and hypothesisCognitive difficulties significantly burdened people with schizophrenia (PWS). However, cognitive assessment is often unavailable in low- and middle-income counties (LMICs) due to a lack of validated and culturally adapted cognitive assessment tools. In this study, we developed and evaluated a culturally sensitive cognitive battery for PWS in Ethiopia. STUDY
designThis study was conducted in three phases. First, we selected appropriate tests through an instrument selection procedure and created a new battery. Then, we rigorously adapted the tests using culturally competent procedures, including cognitive interviewing and expert meetings. Finally, we tested the new battery in 208 PWS and 208 controls. We evaluated its psychometric properties using advanced statistical techniques, including Item Response Theory (IRT). STUDY
resultsThe Ethiopian Cognitive Assessment battery for Schizophrenia (ECAS) was developed from three different batteries. Participants reported tests were easy to complete, and the raters found them easy to administer. All tests had good inter-rater reliability, and the composite score had very high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91). One-factor structure better represented the data with excellent internal consistency (α = .81). ECAS significantly differentiated PWS from controls with 77% sensitivity and 62% specificity at a Z-score ≤0.12 cut-off value. IRT analysis suggested that the battery functions best among moderately impaired participants (difficulty between -0.06 and 0.66).
conclusionsECAS is a practical, tolerable, reliable, and valid assessment of cognition. ECAS can supplement current assessment tools in LAMICs for PWS and can be used to measure cognitive intervention outcomes.
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.