Abstract
There is reported a study performed with a novel paradigm aiming at investigation of the translational validity of von Zerssen’s paranoid-depression scale and its fMRI correlates in terms of focus on exploration of the results on the contrast between the Paranoid Specific (DP) blocks and the Depression Specific (DS) blocks. Patients with schizophrenia demonstrated significant activations in a number of regions (right angular gyrus, left posterior cingulate and precuneus, right transverse temporal gyrus) during responses to paranoia versus depression items which differ topologically from those found in patients with major depression (left middle cingulate and right superior temporal gyrus). The direct comparison between the groups, however, did not yield any residual activations after correction.
Highlights
Considering the status of psychiatry as a hybrid discipline which embraces both the natural sciences and the humanities [1, 2], we attempt to deliver a novel, experimentally fostered concept of translational validity, which is a non-conventional and instrumentalist approach to validation [3].As discussed in earlier publications [4,5,6] clinical and neurobiological measures are considered valid for different reasons inside their own divergent domains
We were able to confirm the sensitivity of the method, still we had to address its specificity. As it has already been stated, such patterns are not likely to trascend to the level of nosological specificity. To handle this last issue and to test the divergent validity, we further developed our paradigm with the specific aim of investigating the translational validity of von Zerssen’s paranoia-depression scale [13] and its functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) correlates during their simultaneous implementation in patients with depression and schizophrenia
Following the logic of our study in terms of differentiating between the clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia and depression by means of simultaneous application of fMRI and a clinical assessment tool, we focused our exploration of the results on the contrast between the Paranoia Specific (DP) blocks and the Depression Specific (DS) blocks
Summary
As discussed in earlier publications [4,5,6] clinical and neurobiological measures are considered valid for different reasons inside their own divergent domains. All disciplines concerned with mental health establish internal or intra-correlative validity, i.e. psychological scales are typically validated against other psychological measures, and neurobiological measures are validated with other neurobiological tests. Psychiatric assessment tools represent a circle of validation between first-person measures (self-evaluation inventories) and third-person perspective, the psychiatric interviews [7]. What is still missing is the inter-correlative or inter-disciplinary validity which entails consistent inter-domain translation. In practical terms the lack of consistent inter-domain translation is undermining the validity of psychiatric classifications as well as the implementation of the research findings in clinical practice [8]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
