Clinical Features of Psychotic Disorders: Comparing Categorical and Dimensional Models

Objective Despite research demonstrating the value of dimensional approaches, standard systems for classifying psychotic disorders rely primarily on categorization of patients into distinct diagnoses. We present the first study comparing analyses of dimensional features, categories, and standard dia...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Caitlin Ravichandran, Dost Ongur, Bruce M. Cohen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2021-03-01
Series:Psychiatric Research and Clinical Practice
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.prcp.20190053
id doaj-51851b56b450484a96a8beac89bb5c8f
record_format Article
spelling doaj-51851b56b450484a96a8beac89bb5c8f2021-03-10T13:33:59ZengWileyPsychiatric Research and Clinical Practice2575-56092021-03-0131293710.1176/appi.prcp.20190053Clinical Features of Psychotic Disorders: Comparing Categorical and Dimensional ModelsCaitlin Ravichandran0Dost Ongur1Bruce M. Cohen2Harvard Medical School Boston MassachusettsHarvard Medical School Boston MassachusettsMcLean Hospital Belmont MassachusettsObjective Despite research demonstrating the value of dimensional approaches, standard systems for classifying psychotic disorders rely primarily on categorization of patients into distinct diagnoses. We present the first study comparing analyses of dimensional features, categories, and standard diagnoses, all derived from the same sample. Methods Using symptom ratings from 934 patients hospitalized for psychosis, we examined dimensional models, fit using factor analysis, categorical models, fit to factor‐based scores from the dimensional model, and their correspondence with DSM‐defined diagnoses. We compared the ability of each model to discriminate patients' assignment to medication regimen as a clinical validator. Results Dimensional modeling identified four factors (manic, depressive, negative symptoms, and positive symptoms), which corresponded to factors in prior studies and appeared robust to statistical approach. Scores based on these factors overlapped substantially among DSM diagnoses. Patients assigned to clusters had less overlap in factor‐based scores. However, categorical models were sensitive to statistical approach. The addition of DSM diagnoses, but not cluster assignments, improved the fits of models with dimensional scores alone as the clinical predictors for some medication classes. Conclusions The results highlight the variability of symptom presentation within DSM‐defined diagnostic categories, the utility of symptom dimensions or factors, and a potential lack of robustness of data‐driven categorical approaches. Findings support initiatives to develop updated diagnostic systems that complement categorical classification of psychotic illness with factors representing dimensional ratings of symptoms.https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.prcp.20190053
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Caitlin Ravichandran
Dost Ongur
Bruce M. Cohen
spellingShingle Caitlin Ravichandran
Dost Ongur
Bruce M. Cohen
Clinical Features of Psychotic Disorders: Comparing Categorical and Dimensional Models
Psychiatric Research and Clinical Practice
author_facet Caitlin Ravichandran
Dost Ongur
Bruce M. Cohen
author_sort Caitlin Ravichandran
title Clinical Features of Psychotic Disorders: Comparing Categorical and Dimensional Models
title_short Clinical Features of Psychotic Disorders: Comparing Categorical and Dimensional Models
title_full Clinical Features of Psychotic Disorders: Comparing Categorical and Dimensional Models
title_fullStr Clinical Features of Psychotic Disorders: Comparing Categorical and Dimensional Models
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Features of Psychotic Disorders: Comparing Categorical and Dimensional Models
title_sort clinical features of psychotic disorders: comparing categorical and dimensional models
publisher Wiley
series Psychiatric Research and Clinical Practice
issn 2575-5609
publishDate 2021-03-01
description Objective Despite research demonstrating the value of dimensional approaches, standard systems for classifying psychotic disorders rely primarily on categorization of patients into distinct diagnoses. We present the first study comparing analyses of dimensional features, categories, and standard diagnoses, all derived from the same sample. Methods Using symptom ratings from 934 patients hospitalized for psychosis, we examined dimensional models, fit using factor analysis, categorical models, fit to factor‐based scores from the dimensional model, and their correspondence with DSM‐defined diagnoses. We compared the ability of each model to discriminate patients' assignment to medication regimen as a clinical validator. Results Dimensional modeling identified four factors (manic, depressive, negative symptoms, and positive symptoms), which corresponded to factors in prior studies and appeared robust to statistical approach. Scores based on these factors overlapped substantially among DSM diagnoses. Patients assigned to clusters had less overlap in factor‐based scores. However, categorical models were sensitive to statistical approach. The addition of DSM diagnoses, but not cluster assignments, improved the fits of models with dimensional scores alone as the clinical predictors for some medication classes. Conclusions The results highlight the variability of symptom presentation within DSM‐defined diagnostic categories, the utility of symptom dimensions or factors, and a potential lack of robustness of data‐driven categorical approaches. Findings support initiatives to develop updated diagnostic systems that complement categorical classification of psychotic illness with factors representing dimensional ratings of symptoms.
url https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.prcp.20190053
work_keys_str_mv AT caitlinravichandran clinicalfeaturesofpsychoticdisorderscomparingcategoricalanddimensionalmodels
AT dostongur clinicalfeaturesofpsychoticdisorderscomparingcategoricalanddimensionalmodels
AT brucemcohen clinicalfeaturesofpsychoticdisorderscomparingcategoricalanddimensionalmodels
_version_ 1724226559351455744