4.6 Article

Functional co-primary measures for clinical trials in schizophrenia: Results from the MATRICS psychometric and standardization study

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
卷 165, 期 2, 页码 221-228

出版社

AMER PSYCHIATRIC PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07010089

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [N01MH22006] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: During the consensus meetings of the National Institute of Mental Health Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (NIMH-MATRICS) Initiative, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration took the position that a drug for this purpose should show changes on 1) an accepted consensus cognitive performance measure and 2) an additional measure (i. e., a co-primary) that is considered functionally meaningful. The goal of the current study was to describe steps to evaluate four potential co-primary measures for psychometric properties and validity. Method: As part of the five-site MATRICS Psychometric and Standardization Study (PASS), two measures of functional capacity and two interview-based measures of cognition were evaluated in 176 patients with schizophrenia (167 of these patients were retested 4 weeks later). Results: Data are presented for each co-primary measure for test-retest reliability, utility as a repeated measure, relationship to cognitive performance, relationship to functioning, tolerability/practicality, and number of missing data. Conclusions: Psychometric properties of all of the measures were considered acceptable, and the measures were generally comparable across the various criteria, except that the functional capacity measures had stronger relationships to cognitive performance and fewer missing data. The development and evaluation of potential co-primary measures is still at an early stage, and it was decided not to endorse a single measure for clinical trials at this point. The current findings offer the initial steps to identify functionally meaningful co-primary measures in this area and will help to guide further evaluation of such measures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据