4.4 Review

Schizophrenia, Just the facts: What we know in 2008: Part I: overview

Journal

SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH
Volume 100, Issue 1-3, Pages 4-19

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2008.01.022

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

For every disorder, there is a set of established findings and accepted constructs upon which further understanding is built. The concept of schizophrenia as a disease entity has been with us for a little more than a century, although descriptions resembling this condition predate this conceptualization. In 1988, for the inaugural issue of Schizophrenia Research, at the invitation of the founding editors, a senior researcher, since deceased (RJ Wyatt)(1) published a summary of generally accepted ideas about the disorder, which he termed the facts of schizophrenia. Ten years later, in conjunction with two of the authors (MSK, RT), he compiled a more extensive set of facts for the purpose of evaluating conceptual models or theoretical constructs developed to understand the nature of schizophrenia. On the 20th anniversary of this journal, we update and substantially expand our effort to periodically summarize the current body of information about schizophrenia. We compile a body of seventy-seven representative major findings and group them in terms of their specific relevance to schizophrenia - etiologies, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and treatments. We rate each such fact' on a 0-3 scale for measures of reproducibility, whether primary to schizophrenia, and durability over time. We also pose one or more critical questions with reference to each fact answers to which might help better elucidate the meaning of that finding for our understanding of schizophrenia. We intend to follow this paper with the submission to the journal of a series of topic-specific articles, critically reviewing the evidence. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available