Search

BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to explore the effect of gender, age at onset, and duration on the long-term course of schizophrenia. METHODS: Twenty-nine centers from 25 countries representing all continents participated in the study that included 2358 patients aged 37.21 ± 11.87 years with a DSM-IV or DSM-5 diagnosis of schizophrenia; the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale as well as relevant clinicodemographic data were gathered. Analysis of variance and analysis of covariance were used, and the methodology corrected for the presence of potentially confounding effects. RESULTS: There was a 3-year later age at onset for females (P < .001) and lower rates of negative symptoms (P < .01) and higher depression/anxiety measures (P < .05) at some stages. The age at onset manifested a distribution with a single peak for both genders with a tendency of patients with younger onset having slower advancement through illness stages (P = .001). No significant effects were found concerning duration of illness. DISCUSSION: Our results confirmed a later onset and a possibly more benign course and outcome in females. Age at onset manifested a single peak in both genders, and surprisingly, earlier onset was related to a slower progression of the illness. No effect of duration has been detected. These results are partially in accord with the literature, but they also differ as a consequence of the different starting point of our methodology (a novel staging model), which in our opinion precluded the impact of confounding effects. Future research should focus on the therapeutic policy and implications of these results in more representative samples.

Background. The aim of the current study was to explore the changing interrelationships among clinical variables through the stages of schizophrenia in order to assemble a comprehensive and meaningful disease model. Methods. Twenty-nine centers from 25 countries participated and included 2358 patients aged 37.21 ± 11.87 years with schizophrenia. Multiple linear regression analysis and visual inspection of plots were performed. Results. The results suggest that with progression stages, there are changing correlations among Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale factors at each stage and each factor correlates with all the others in that particular stage, in which this factor is dominant. This internal structure further supports the validity of an already proposed four stages model, with positive symptoms dominating the first stage, excitement/hostility the second, depression the third, and neurocognitive decline the last stage. Conclusions. The current study investigated the mental organization and functioning in patients with schizophrenia in relation to different stages of illness progression. It revealed two distinct “cores” of schizophrenia, the “Positive” and the “Negative,” while neurocognitive decline escalates during the later stages. Future research should focus on the therapeutic implications of such a model. Stopping the progress of the illness could demand to stop the succession of stages. This could be achieved not only by both halting the triggering effect of positive and negative symptoms, but also by stopping the sensitization effect on the neural pathways responsible for the development of hostility, excitement, anxiety, and depression as well as the deleterious effect on neural networks responsible for neurocognition.

INTRODUCTION: A specific clinically relevant staging model for schizophrenia has not yet been developed. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the factor structure of the PANSS and develop such a staging method. METHODS: Twenty-nine centers from 25 countries contributed 2358 patients aged 37.21 ± 11.87 years with schizophrenia. Analysis of covariance, Exploratory Factor Analysis, Discriminant Function Analysis, and inspection of resultant plots were performed. RESULTS: Exploratory Factor Analysis returned 5 factors explaining 59% of the variance (positive, negative, excitement/hostility, depression/anxiety, and neurocognition). The staging model included 4 main stages with substages that were predominantly characterized by a single domain of symptoms (stage 1: positive; stages 2a and 2b: excitement/hostility; stage 3a and 3b: depression/anxiety; stage 4a and 4b: neurocognition). There were no differences between sexes. The Discriminant Function Analysis developed an algorithm that correctly classified >85% of patients. DISCUSSION: This study elaborates a 5-factor solution and a clinical staging method for patients with schizophrenia. It is the largest study to address these issues among patients who are more likely to remain affiliated with mental health services for prolonged periods of time.

To assess the clinical validity of individual DSM-IV criteria for hypomania. In an international sample of 5,635 patients with major depressive episodes (Bridge Study), DSM-IV criteria for hypomania (stem questions, number and quality of symptoms, duration and exclusion criteria) were systematically assessed and their validity analysed on the basis of clinical data including family history, course, and other clinical characteristics. Three stem questions for hypomania, irritability, elevated mood and the added question of increased activity, showed comparable validity. The results support the current DSM-IV requirement for a higher symptom threshold (4 of 7 hypomanic symptoms) in cases of irritable mood. Longer durations of hypomanic episodes were associated with higher scores on all validators. The results did not support the DSM-IV durational requirements for hypomanic episodes (4days) and manic episodes (7days). Brief hypomanic episodes of 1, 2 or 3days were valid and would meet validity criteria for inclusion. The three exclusion criteria in DSM-IV (hypomania due to the use of antidepressants or of other substances, or to other medical conditions) were found to exclude patients with bipolar depression and should therefore not be retained. These results support several revisions of the DSM-IV concept of hypomanic episodes: specifically, the inclusion of increased activity as a gate question, the inclusion of 1 or 2 to 3-day episodes and the elimination of all exclusion criteria

The definitions of bipolar-I (BP-I) and bipolar-II (BP-II) disorders are currently under revision by the APA and by the WHO. We provide evidence of a revised set of criteria for bipolar disorders and major depressive disorder (MDD) which could serve to strengthen the construct and predictive validity of both disorders and enable more incisive studies of treatments and courses of both disorders. In the diagnostic Bridge Study of 5,635 patients with major depressive episodes from 18 countries (Europe, North Africa, Near East and Far East) leading psychiatrists in each country assessed a pre-specified group of symptoms, illness course, family history and duration of episodes; these data allowed tests of several definitions of bipolarity. The primary revised specifier diagnosis of BP-I disorder included manic episodes based on an additional category A criterion (increased activity/energy) and did not apply any exclusion criteria. The revised BP-II disorders included hypomanic episodes of 1-3days. Family history and illness course validators (history of mania/hypomania among first degree relatives, 2 or more lifetime episodes and first symptoms having occurred before age 30) discriminated clearly between patients with bipolar-I or bipolar-II disorders meeting bipolarity specifier criteria and those with MDD. Specifier definitions provided better discrimination between MDD and the two bipolar subgroups. Patterns of concurrent comorbidities also differed significantly between patients meeting criteria for MDD compared with those meeting bipolar specifier criteria. Comorbidity patterns differed between bipolar-I and bipolar-II patients. This study provides evidence for the validity of modified (specifier) BP-I and BP-II definitions that incorporate illness course and family history which reduce ambiguities of major depressive episodes between bipolar-I and bipolar-II disorders and MDD

OBJECTIVE To evaluate aggressiveness during a major depressive episode (MDE) and its relationship with bipolar disorder (BD) in a post hoc analysis of the BRIDGE-II-MIX study. METHOD A total of 2811 individuals were enrolled in this multicenter cross-sectional study. MDE patients with (MDE-A, n = 399) and without aggressiveness (MDE-N, n = 2412) were compared through chi-square test or Student's t-test. A stepwise backward logistic regression model was performed. RESULTS MDE-A group was more frequently associated with BD (P < 0.001), while aggressiveness was negatively correlated with unipolar depression (P < 0.001). At the logistic regression, aggressiveness was associated with the age at first depressive episode (P < 0.001); the severity of mania (P = 0.03); the diagnosis of BD (P = 0.001); comorbid borderline personality disorder (BPD) (P < 0.001) but not substance abuse (P = 0.63); no current psychiatric treatment (P < 0.001); psychotic symptoms (P = 0.007); the marked social/occupational impairment (P = 0.002). The variable most significantly associated with aggressiveness was the presence of DSM-5 mixed features (P < 0.001, OR = 3.815). After the exclusion of BPD, the variable of lifetime suicide attempts became significant (P = 0.013, OR = 1.405). CONCLUSION Aggressiveness seems to be significantly associated with bipolar spectrum disorders, independently from BPD and substance abuse. Aggressiveness should be considered as a diagnostic criterion for the mixed features specifier and a target of tailored treatment strategy.

Little is known about the correlates of comorbid drug and alcohol dependence in people with schizophrenia outside the USA. We tested hypotheses that dependence on alcohol/drugs would be associated with more severe symptoms, and poorer psychosocial functioning and quality of life. The EuroSC Cohort study (N=1204), based in France, Germany and the UK, used semi-structured clinical interviews for diagnoses, and standardized tools to assess correlates. We used mixed models to compare outcomes between past-year comorbid dependence on alcohol/drugs, controlling for covariates and modelling both subject and country-level effects. Participants dependent on alcohol or drugs had fewer negative symptoms on PANSS than their non-dependent counterparts. However, those dependent on alcohol scored higher on PANSS general psychopathology than those who were not, or dependent only on drugs. People with schizophrenia dependent on drugs had poorer quality of life, more extrapyramidal side effects, and scored worse on Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) than those without dependence. People with alcohol dependence reported more reasons for non-compliance with medication, and poorer functioning on GAF, though not on Global Assessment of Relational Functioning. In people with schizophrenia, comorbid dependence on alcohol or drugs is associated with impaired clinical and psychosocial adjustment, and poorer quality of life.

The definitions of bipolar-I (BP-I) and bipolar-II (BP-II) disorders are currently under revision by the APA and by the WHO. We provide evidence of a revised set of criteria for bipolar disorders and major depressive disorder (MDD) which could serve to strengthen the construct and predictive validity of both disorders and enable more incisive studies of treatments and courses of both disorders. In the diagnostic Bridge Study of 5,635 patients with major depressive episodes from 18 countries (Europe, North Africa, Near East and Far East) leading psychiatrists in each country assessed a pre-specified group of symptoms, illness course, family history and duration of episodes; these data allowed tests of several definitions of bipolarity. The primary revised specifier diagnosis of BP-I disorder included manic episodes based on an additional category A criterion (increased activity/energy) and did not apply any exclusion criteria. The revised BP-II disorders included hypomanic episodes of 1-3days. Family history and illness course validators (history of mania/hypomania among first degree relatives, 2 or more lifetime episodes and first symptoms having occurred before age 30) discriminated clearly between patients with bipolar-I or bipolar-II disorders meeting bipolarity specifier criteria and those with MDD. Specifier definitions provided better discrimination between MDD and the two bipolar subgroups. Patterns of concurrent comorbidities also differed significantly between patients meeting criteria for MDD compared with those meeting bipolar specifier criteria. Comorbidity patterns differed between bipolar-I and bipolar-II patients. This study provides evidence for the validity of modified (specifier) BP-I and BP-II definitions that incorporate illness course and family history which reduce ambiguities of major depressive episodes between bipolar-I and bipolar-II disorders and MDD

To assess the clinical validity of individual DSM-IV criteria for hypomania. In an international sample of 5,635 patients with major depressive episodes (Bridge Study), DSM-IV criteria for hypomania (stem questions, number and quality of symptoms, duration and exclusion criteria) were systematically assessed and their validity analysed on the basis of clinical data including family history, course, and other clinical characteristics. Three stem questions for hypomania, irritability, elevated mood and the added question of increased activity, showed comparable validity. The results support the current DSM-IV requirement for a higher symptom threshold (4 of 7 hypomanic symptoms) in cases of irritable mood. Longer durations of hypomanic episodes were associated with higher scores on all validators. The results did not support the DSM-IV durational requirements for hypomanic episodes (4days) and manic episodes (7days). Brief hypomanic episodes of 1, 2 or 3days were valid and would meet validity criteria for inclusion. The three exclusion criteria in DSM-IV (hypomania due to the use of antidepressants or of other substances, or to other medical conditions) were found to exclude patients with bipolar depression and should therefore not be retained. These results support several revisions of the DSM-IV concept of hypomanic episodes: specifically, the inclusion of increased activity as a gate question, the inclusion of 1 or 2 to 3-day episodes and the elimination of all exclusion criteria

Relatively little is known about rates of comorbid drug and alcohol problems in people with schizophrenia outside the USA. Most studies have recruited from single countries. Newly available data provided an unmatched opportunity to investigate the prevalence of comorbid dependence on alcohol and other psychoactive substances in people with schizophrenia in France, Germany and the UK at the same time. The European Schizophrenia Cohort study data set used semi-structured clinical interviews to establish DSM-IV diagnoses. 1,208 patients were interviewed in nine centres. The lifetime rate for comorbid dependence on any substance was highest in the UK (35 %), but considerably lower in Germany (21 %) and in France (19 %), and generally more than double the past-year rates. Dependence on alcohol and on other psychoactive substances showed similar variations (comorbid alcohol dependence: UK 26 %; Germany 18 %; France 14 %; comorbid drug dependence: UK 18 %; Germany 8 %; France 7 %). Differences within countries persisted after controlling for individual characteristics. The relative odds of dependence were higher than in the general population, but varied between countries and centres. Dependence disorders are a common problem in people with schizophrenia in Western Europe, although effective service configurations have yet to be developed. Overall, these European rates are less than those reported from the USA. Research comparing people with current comorbidity with those who are no longer dependent is needed. © Springer-Verlag 2012.

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to examine the prevalence of mixed methods research acrossseveral business and management fields and to gauge the level of acceptance of mixed methods withinthese fields.Design/methodology/approach – The methodology employed for this study involved synthesizingthe findings from six large-scale methodological scans of business and management discipline journalsin seven fields: marketing, international business, strategic management, organizational behaviour,operations management, entrepreneurship and human resource management.Findings – The study finds that quantitative studies dominate all seven fields (76 per cent ofempirical articles) followed by mixed methods (14 per cent of empirical articles) and qualitative studies(10 per cent of empirical articles). In applying the framework for acceptance levels, it would seem thereexists minimal acceptance of mixed methods across these fields.Research limitations/implications – The study has limitations related to the coverage of differentdisciplines and differences in sample sets. More extensive research is planned for the future and willinvolve an expanded mixed method prevalence rate study across additional business and managementfields.Practical implications – The growing use of mixed methods has practical implications for researchtraining and capacity building within business schools. The study points to the need to developresearch capacity through the introduction of postgraduate courses in mixed methods and advancedresearch skills training for existing researchers.Originality/value – Mixed methods is a relatively new and emerging methodological movement.This paper attempts to gauge the use and level of acceptance of mixed methods across a diverse rangeof business and management discipline areas.

Mixed methods research (the combined use of quantitative and qualitative methods in the same study) is becoming an increasingly popular approach in the discipline fields of sociology, psychology, education and health sciences. Calls for the integration of quantitative and qualitative research methods have been advanced in these fields. A key feature of mixed methods research is its methodological pluralism, which frequently results in research which provides broader perspectives than those offered by monomethod designs. The overall purpose and central premise of mixed methods is that the use of quantitative and qualitative approaches in combination provides a better understanding of research problems and complex phenomena than either approach alone. Despite calls for the combined use of quantitative and qualitative research in business and management studies, the use of mixed methods in business and management has seldom been studied. The purpose of this paper is to review the application of mixed methods research within organisational research. The study reported in this paper identifies the use of mixed methods in three organisational journals for the period 2003 to 2009: the Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Organizational Behavior and Organizational Research Methods. The landmark Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003) Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, played a pivotal role in providing both the visibility and credibility of mixed methods as a third methodological movement and since the publication of this seminal work the mixed methods movement has rapidly gained popularity. Business and management researchers need to be made aware of the growing use and acceptance of mixed methods research across business and organisational journals. This paper examines the main characteristics of mixed methods studies identified in the sample in terms of purposes and designs, and posits suggestions on the application of mixed methodologies.

In order to study clinical aspects of depression in psychotic patients, it is necessary to first differentiate between the following states, as a function of the currently accepted international classification of mental disorders: 1) depressions correlated with psychotic symptomatology (delirium, hallucinations); 2) psychotic disorders with depressive symptomatology; 3) schizo-affective disorders. The greatest interest is currently in the assessment of the second category, in particular study of depression in schizophrenics. This is due to a number of factors, including the relatively great frequency of the disorder, its differential significance as a function of the time in the natural history of the disease, as well as prognostic and therapeutic implications. Proper clinical evaluation is thus important. Until the last few years, this evaluation was based primarily upon use of depression scales or factorial scores, either from general psychopathology scales or specific schizophrenia scales. A number of empirical studies have recently cast some doubt upon validity of these scales for evaluation of depression in psychotic patients, and more specific instruments such as the Calgary Depression Scale (CDS) and the Psychotic Depression Scale (PDS) have been developed. The first validation studies with these scales open up an interesting perspective, in particular for the evaluation of the effects of neuroleptics.

To assess the clinical validity of individual DSM-IV criteria for hypomania. In an international sample of 5,635 patients with major depressive episodes (Bridge Study), DSM-IV criteria for hypomania (stem questions, number and quality of symptoms, duration and exclusion criteria) were systematically assessed and their validity analysed on the basis of clinical data including family history, course, and other clinical characteristics. Three stem questions for hypomania, irritability, elevated mood and the added question of increased activity, showed comparable validity. The results support the current DSM-IV requirement for a higher symptom threshold (4 of 7 hypomanic symptoms) in cases of irritable mood. Longer durations of hypomanic episodes were associated with higher scores on all validators. The results did not support the DSM-IV durational requirements for hypomanic episodes (4days) and manic episodes (7days). Brief hypomanic episodes of 1, 2 or 3days were valid and would meet validity criteria for inclusion. The three exclusion criteria in DSM-IV (hypomania due to the use of antidepressants or of other substances, or to other medical conditions) were found to exclude patients with bipolar depression and should therefore not be retained. These results support several revisions of the DSM-IV concept of hypomanic episodes: specifically, the inclusion of increased activity as a gate question, the inclusion of 1 or 2 to 3-day episodes and the elimination of all exclusion criteria

The definitions of bipolar-I (BP-I) and bipolar-II (BP-II) disorders are currently under revision by the APA and by the WHO. We provide evidence of a revised set of criteria for bipolar disorders and major depressive disorder (MDD) which could serve to strengthen the construct and predictive validity of both disorders and enable more incisive studies of treatments and courses of both disorders. In the diagnostic Bridge Study of 5,635 patients with major depressive episodes from 18 countries (Europe, North Africa, Near East and Far East) leading psychiatrists in each country assessed a pre-specified group of symptoms, illness course, family history and duration of episodes; these data allowed tests of several definitions of bipolarity. The primary revised specifier diagnosis of BP-I disorder included manic episodes based on an additional category A criterion (increased activity/energy) and did not apply any exclusion criteria. The revised BP-II disorders included hypomanic episodes of 1-3days. Family history and illness course validators (history of mania/hypomania among first degree relatives, 2 or more lifetime episodes and first symptoms having occurred before age 30) discriminated clearly between patients with bipolar-I or bipolar-II disorders meeting bipolarity specifier criteria and those with MDD. Specifier definitions provided better discrimination between MDD and the two bipolar subgroups. Patterns of concurrent comorbidities also differed significantly between patients meeting criteria for MDD compared with those meeting bipolar specifier criteria. Comorbidity patterns differed between bipolar-I and bipolar-II patients. This study provides evidence for the validity of modified (specifier) BP-I and BP-II definitions that incorporate illness course and family history which reduce ambiguities of major depressive episodes between bipolar-I and bipolar-II disorders and MDD