ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin open2024
Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: An Empirical Benchmark Study of Real-world Diagnostic Accuracy and Reliability Among Leading International Psychiatrists.
Article in Schizophrenia bulletin open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Behavioral differences in cooperation between patients with schizophrenia and control participants.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Reliability of psychiatric diagnoses in the 21Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Diagnosing schizophrenia spectrum disorders: Large language models (LLMs) vs. leading international psychiatrists (LIPs).Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025Article
- Schizophrenia treatment preferences of psychiatrists versus guidelines: A European perspective.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025Review
- A controlled trial examining large Language model conformity in psychiatric assessment using the Asch paradigm.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Close, yet so far away: a phenomenology of the praecox feeling in the diagnosis of schizophrenia as intercorporeal alienness.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and hypothesis: Assigning a psychiatric diagnosis in real-world situations is often difficult, given that the clinical presentation does not usually conform to the list of condensed, simplified behavioral descriptors of mainstream operational taxonomies (MOT) (eg, ICD-11 and DSM-5). The goal of this study was to benchmark diagnostic accuracy and reliability on a central and severe spectrum of psychopathology (ie, the schizophrenia spectrum disorders [SSDs]), adopting a pragmatic approach as close as possible to real-world clinical settings. Study Design: We examined the diagnostic performance of 30 international psychiatrists experts in SSD. The clinicians were asked to make their clinical best diagnostic estimate for two written clinical vignettes excerpted from real-world SSD cases. Study Results: In the first vignette, 22 out of the 30 clinicians (73.5%) indicated a SSD as their main diagnostic hypothesis. In the second vignette, 12 clinicians (40%) chose SSD as their main diagnostic hypothesis. Only 10 of the 30 clinicians (33%) correctly identified both vignettes as cases of SSD. The level of interrater diagnostic agreement (Fleiss' Kappa) was low but statistically significant (K Conclusions: The results suggest that, even in a sample of influential international psychiatrists, the diagnostic accuracy and reliability on SSD presentations is poor and substantially inferior to those obtained in reliability studies using structured or semi-structured interviews. The widespread adoption of MOT systems in the last decades may have inadvertently eroded the ability of clinicians to detect a typical pattern of psychiatric illnesses.
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.