BackgroundNegative symptoms of schizophrenia are linked with poor functioning and quality of life. Therefore, appropriate measurement tools to assess negative symptoms are needed. The NIMH-MATRICS Consensus defined five domains for negative symptoms, which The Brief Negative Symptom Scale (BNSS) covers.MethodsWe used the COSMIN guidelines for systematic reviews to evaluate the quality of psychometric data of the BNSS scale as a Clinician-Rated Outcome Measure (ClinROM).ResultsThe search strategy resulted in the inclusion of 17 articles. When using the risk of bias checklist, there was a generally good quality in reporting of structural validity and hypothesis testing. Internal consistency, reliability and cross-cultural validity were of poorer quality. ClinROM development and content validity showed inadequate results. According to the updated criteria of good measurement properties, structural validity, internal consistency and interrater reliability showed good results, while hypothesis testing showed poorer results. Cross-cultural validity and test-retest reliability were indeterminate. The updated GRADE approach resulted in a moderate grade.ConclusionsWe can potentially recommend the use of the BNSS as a concise tool to rate negative symptoms. Due to weaknesses in certain domains further validations are warranted.

The Brief negative Symptom Scale (BNSS): a systematic review of measurement properties

Galderisi, Silvana;Mucci, Armida;Giordano, Giulia Maria;
2023

Abstract

BackgroundNegative symptoms of schizophrenia are linked with poor functioning and quality of life. Therefore, appropriate measurement tools to assess negative symptoms are needed. The NIMH-MATRICS Consensus defined five domains for negative symptoms, which The Brief Negative Symptom Scale (BNSS) covers.MethodsWe used the COSMIN guidelines for systematic reviews to evaluate the quality of psychometric data of the BNSS scale as a Clinician-Rated Outcome Measure (ClinROM).ResultsThe search strategy resulted in the inclusion of 17 articles. When using the risk of bias checklist, there was a generally good quality in reporting of structural validity and hypothesis testing. Internal consistency, reliability and cross-cultural validity were of poorer quality. ClinROM development and content validity showed inadequate results. According to the updated criteria of good measurement properties, structural validity, internal consistency and interrater reliability showed good results, while hypothesis testing showed poorer results. Cross-cultural validity and test-retest reliability were indeterminate. The updated GRADE approach resulted in a moderate grade.ConclusionsWe can potentially recommend the use of the BNSS as a concise tool to rate negative symptoms. Due to weaknesses in certain domains further validations are warranted.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11591/509028
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact