Schizophrenia Bulletin Advance Access originally published online on September 11, 2008
Schizophrenia Bulletin 2008 34(6):1003-1005; doi:10.1093/schbul/sbn125
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Maryland Psychiatric Research Center. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.
A Few Methodologic Issues of Note
| The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below. |
We have made progress in the past few decades in our understanding of psychiatric illnesses and identifying effective treatments. We can further this advancement by applying more stringent methods in our studies. In this editorial, I outline some of my favorite points of vexation in what I consider to be critical methodological shortfalls in studies of schizophrenia.
I will first consider an old favorite: negative symptoms. I think all authors of articles on schizophrenia agree that the avolitional pathology described by Kraepelin1 is a core pathology affecting some, but not all, persons with schizophrenia. Parenthetically, the "not all" arises from present day emphasis on reality distortion symptoms as diagnostic criteria regardless of the presence of avolitional pathology. The negative symptom
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?