The Brief Negative Symptom Scale: Validation in a multicenter Brazilian study

Medeiros, Heydrich Lopes Virgulino de; Vasconcelos, Selene Cordeiro; Elkis, Hélio; Martins, Diana; Leite, Raissa Miranda de Alexandria; Albuquerque, Ana; Freitas, Rosana; Scardoelli, Maria Alice; Sarno, Elaine Di; Napolitano, Isabel Cristina; Oliveira, Graça; Vizzotto, Adriana Dias Barbosa; Silva, Antônio Medeiros Peregrino da; Lima, Murilo Duarte da Costa

doi:10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.06.007

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it should be noted that several factors in this study, which included assessments using videotaped interviews and relatively uniform rater backgrounds, may render these psychometric properties higher to an extent. Convergent validity shown by a strong correlation with SANS and discriminant validity shown by no correlation with SAPS were also concordant with previous studies, 9,11,17,24,26 which confirms the assumption of a common and established construct for negative symptoms. Each subscale of BNSS showed high correlation with its corresponding subscale of SANS (BNSS Anhedonia, BNSS Asociality, and SANS Asociality/ Anhedonia; BNSS Avolition and SANS Avolition, BNSS Blunted Affect, and SANS Blunted Affect; BNSS Alogia and SANS Alogia).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Overall, the BNSS showed good psychometric properties, which mostly replicated the results of validation studies in the original and several other language versions of BNSS. 9,11,17,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30] The total BNSS score in this study was slightly higher than those of previously reported. 11,17,26 This may be because three of ten of our subjects were inpatients who were stable but had more severe negative symptoms than did outpatient subjects.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…5,8 Factor analysis revealed two-factor solutions, which were concordant with previous studies. 9,18,24,26,27 However, our result is unique in that items 5 and 6 in the Asociality subscale loaded to the same factor as items in Blunted Affect and Alogia subscales, and not Anhedonia and Avolition subscales. Although the items in Anhedonia, Avolition, and Asociality subscales loaded to the same factor in a previous factor analysis in BNSS 9,18,24,26,27 and CAINS, 13 recent studies revealed that five or more factor models fit better than two-factor models in BNSS and CAINS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 54%

“…9,18,24,26,27 However, our result is unique in that items 5 and 6 in the Asociality subscale loaded to the same factor as items in Blunted Affect and Alogia subscales, and not Anhedonia and Avolition subscales. Although the items in Anhedonia, Avolition, and Asociality subscales loaded to the same factor in a previous factor analysis in BNSS 9,18,24,26,27 and CAINS, 13 recent studies revealed that five or more factor models fit better than two-factor models in BNSS and CAINS. 28,[33][34][35] This is in line with the following idea in the original NIMH report: "The five domains may have separate neurobiological substrates and may represent separate therapeutic targets."…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 54%

“…22,23 To date, the BNSS has been translated and validated in many languages. 9,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30] Collectively, these studies provide evidence of adequate psychometric properties and a two-factor structure of BNSS in these languages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 4 more Smart Citations

<p>Pilot Validation Study of the Japanese Translation of the Brief Negative Symptoms Scale (BNSS)</p>

Hashimoto

Toyomaki

Oka

et al. 2019

NDT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The brief negative symptoms scale (BNSS) is a concise instrument used to assess negative symptoms of subjects with schizophrenia covering five domains of negative symptoms and is suitable for use in clinical, experimental, and epidemiological settings. The original and translated version of BNSS has thus far been shown to have adequate psychometric properties. This study aimed to examine internal consistency, inter-rater and test-retest reliability, discriminant and convergent validity, and factor structure of the Japanese version of BNSS. Patients and methods: The assessment was performed by 11 raters using interview videos of nine subjects. Reliability was calculated with Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency and intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) for inter-rater reliability. Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated to estimate the test-retest reliability. In addition to BNSS, Scale for assessment of negative symptoms (SANS) and scale for assessment of positive symptoms (SAPS) was obtained to assess the convergent and discriminant validity. Factor structure was assessed using principle factor analysis. Results: The Japanese BNSS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.95), inter-rater reliability (intra class correlation coefficient=0.97), and test-retest reliability (r=0.94, p<0.001). The convergent validity shown by correlation with SANS total score (r=0.87, p<0.001) and discriminant validity shown by correlation with SAPS total score (r=0.17, p=−0.68) were also good. Principal factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure of BNSS, although the loading of each item differed from that in the literature. Conclusion: Our pilot study demonstrated that Japanese BNSS had good psychometric properties which were achieved with relatively brief training. Further studies with more subjects and raters with various backgrounds recruited from multiple sites are warranted.

show abstract