SynthesisSchizophrenia bulletin2024
Clinician-Reported Negative Symptom Scales: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.
Synthesis in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2024. 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.
- AI-enabled passive digital phenotyping of experiential negative symptoms in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: a narrative review on the path from sensing to clinical endpoints.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Negative symptoms in schizophrenia: Methodological challenges and emerging solutions for outcome measurement.Neuroscience applied · 2026Review
- Systematic Review of Self-Assessment Scales for Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Illness Severity in Psychotic Disorders Amplifies Anterior Insula's Sensitivity to Unreciprocated Smiles.Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNegative symptoms of schizophrenia are correlated with reduction of normal function and lower quality of life. They were newly defined by the NIMH-MATRICS Consensus in 2005, dividing the rating tools to assess them into first-generation scales, developed before the Consensus, and second-generation scales, based on the recently introduced definitions.
methodsThe COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instrument (COSMIN) guidelines for systematic reviews were used to evaluate the quality of psychometric data of the first-generation scales that cover the 5 negative symptom domains of the NIMHS Consensus: the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS), the High Royds Evaluation of Negativity Scale (HEN), and the Negative Symptom Assessment-16 (NSA-16).
resultsThe search strategy resulted in the inclusion of a total of 13 articles, 7 for the SANS, 4 for the NSA-16, and 2 for the HEN. For the SANS and the NSA-16, the overall results of the scales' measurement properties are mostly insufficient or indeterminate. The quality of evidence for the HEN is poor, due to a small number of validation studies/included patients.
conclusionsAfter applying the COSMIN guidelines, we do not recommend the usage of these first-generation scales to rate negative symptoms. At the minimum they require further validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.