170 hospitalised patients (96 schizophrenic, 71 depressive, and 3 manic) were examined using the German version of the CPRS. Based on factor analytical results four subscales (‘manic syndrome’, ‘schizophrenic syndrome’, ‘depressive syndrome’, and ‘side-effects’) and two second-order scales (‘manic-depressive syndrome’ and ‘schizophrenic syndrome’) were constructed. The first three subscales show a good reliability. The fourth subscale (‘side-effects’) has an unsufficient internal consistency, mainly due to the small number of items (6). The two subscales ‘schizophrenic syndrome’ and ‘depressive syndrome’ and the two second-order scales can differentiate very well between schizophrenic and depressive syndromes. The validity of the first and fourth subscale could not be examined in this study.

No abstract

The interrater reliability of the AMP system and the Comprehensive Psychiatric Rating Scale (CPRS) was compared in a sample of 30 hospitalized schizophrenic or depressive patients. The CPRS proved to have on average a slightly higher reliability on both the level of items and primary scales. The reliability of the secondary scales was nearly identical.

The interrater reliability of the German version of the CPRS was examined in 30 patients (18 schizophrenic, 11 depressive and 1 manic). All patients were examined by the same two raters. The agreement of 55 out of 65 items was determined using the kappa coefficient. Kappa was calculated concerning symptom present/not present and difference ≤ 2/difference > 2. 49 or 54 items show a moderate to excellent agreement. Items based on self-rating have a better interrater reliability than items based on the rating of the psychiatrists. The interrater reliability of the syndromes was calculated, using the rank correlation coefficient. The agreement concerning the 4 primary and the 2 second-order factors is high or excellent. The good results show the usefulness of the CPRS for the assessment of psychopathological findings.

Using a sample of 170 patients the psychopathological contents of the AMP system and the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS) were compared by canonical correlations. The nine primary AMP scales predict 86% of the variance of the three CPRS scales. 64% of the variance of the nine AMP scales is explained by the CPRS scales. The secondary scales are nearly equivalent. The univariate analysis showed that all AMP scales with the exception of the ‘hostility syndrome’ and the ‘catatonic syndrome’ correlate highly with one of the psychopathological CPRS scales.