ArticlePloS one2025
Measurement properties of instruments to assess insight in psychosis: A systematic review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Instruments for assessing insight in psychosis: A systematic review of psychometric properties.Psychological medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Arabic validation of the VAGUS insight into psychosis scale among Lebanese patients with schizophrenia.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionInsight in psychosis, defined as a patient's awareness and judgment of their mental illness, is a complex and evolving concept. Historically, the absence of insight was considered a defining characteristic of psychosis, but recent decades have seen the development of structured tools for its assessment. This systematic review aims to critically appraise the measurement properties of instruments used to assess insight in individuals with schizophrenia spectrum, bridging the gap between theoretical conceptualization and clinical practice.
methodsThis protocol is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. Eligible studies will evaluate instruments measuring insight in psychosis, including self-report, observer ratings, behavioral measurements, and semi-structured interviews. The psychometric properties assessed will encompass reliability, validity, responsiveness, interpretability, and clinical utility. We will include primary quantitative studies published in peer-reviewed journals and available in English.
resultsTwo reviewers will conduct data extraction and quality assessment independently, with discrepancies resolved through consensus or a third reviewer. The COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist and the GRADE approach will be used to evaluate each measure's methodological quality and overall strength of evidence. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will synthesize current evidence on insight measurement in psychosis, providing a comprehensive overview of the strengths and limitations of existing instruments. The findings will inform future research and clinical practice, facilitating the selection of the most appropriate tools for assessing insight and ultimately contributing to improved care for individuals with psychosis. The findings will provide clinicians and researchers with robust tools for assessing insight, ultimately enhancing treatment outcomes for individuals with psychosis.
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.