Introduction: Although the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) is widely used for evaluating patients with schizophrenia, the meaning of the weights of the individual symptoms is ambiguous. The aims of the study wer...Introduction: Although the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) is widely used for evaluating patients with schizophrenia, the meaning of the weights of the individual symptoms is ambiguous. The aims of the study were 1) to investigate whether the modification of relative weights of items of the BPRS is able to enhance its correlation with the Clinical Global Impression-Schizophrenia scale (CGI-SCH) and 2) to construct a potential modified BPRS. Methods: We evaluated 200 schizophrenia patients using the BPRS and the CGI-SCH and drew the scatter plot distributions of the two scales. Next, univariate regression for the CGI-SCH using individual symptoms of the BPRS was performed. Multivariate regression utilizing the ‘logistic function’ was then conducted to allocate marks to each item and Pearson’s r correlation coefficient and r-squared between the two scales were assessed. After that, we constructed an example of a potential modified BPRS. Results: With the scatter plot for the two scales, a logarithmic curve was obtained;this was described by [CGI-SCH] = 3.2248 × ln[18-item BPRS] – 7.2044 (p i” that could express the relative weights of individual symptoms. Subsequently, modification of point allocations according to “Pi” yielded a Pearson’s r of 0.8491 and an r-squared of 0.7718 (not changed) (both p < 0.001). An example of a potential modified BPRS was constructed. Conclusions: Within the limits of our data, the weightings of items of the BPRS improved the correlation of the BPRS with the CGI-SCH for evaluating schizophrenia.展开更多
文摘Introduction: Although the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) is widely used for evaluating patients with schizophrenia, the meaning of the weights of the individual symptoms is ambiguous. The aims of the study were 1) to investigate whether the modification of relative weights of items of the BPRS is able to enhance its correlation with the Clinical Global Impression-Schizophrenia scale (CGI-SCH) and 2) to construct a potential modified BPRS. Methods: We evaluated 200 schizophrenia patients using the BPRS and the CGI-SCH and drew the scatter plot distributions of the two scales. Next, univariate regression for the CGI-SCH using individual symptoms of the BPRS was performed. Multivariate regression utilizing the ‘logistic function’ was then conducted to allocate marks to each item and Pearson’s r correlation coefficient and r-squared between the two scales were assessed. After that, we constructed an example of a potential modified BPRS. Results: With the scatter plot for the two scales, a logarithmic curve was obtained;this was described by [CGI-SCH] = 3.2248 × ln[18-item BPRS] – 7.2044 (p i” that could express the relative weights of individual symptoms. Subsequently, modification of point allocations according to “Pi” yielded a Pearson’s r of 0.8491 and an r-squared of 0.7718 (not changed) (both p < 0.001). An example of a potential modified BPRS was constructed. Conclusions: Within the limits of our data, the weightings of items of the BPRS improved the correlation of the BPRS with the CGI-SCH for evaluating schizophrenia.
