Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Jan 30.
Published in final edited form as: Psychiatry Res. 2012 Sep 10;205(1-2):137–142. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2012.08.019

Table 3.

Construction of proposed solution and comparison to previous models

# items shared with proposed consensus model
Proposed
model
factors and
items:		 Van der Gaag et al, 2006 (30
item;

9/10 cross
validations
model)		 Pyramidal
Model (25
item;
dropped
items

P2, P6
,N5,N7,G10)

Kay & Sevy, 1990 		Pentagonal
model (25 item;
dropped items
P2,P6,G10,G12,
G16)

White et al., 1997 		Marder et al, 1997

(30 item)		 Citrome et al, 2011

(30
item)		 Reininghaus et al. 2012

(30 item)
Sample size 5769 240 1233 512 3580 816
POS: P1,
P3, P5, P6,
G9		 5/5
(100%)		 4/5 (80%) 4/5 (80%) 5/5
(100%)		 5/5
(100%)		 5/5 (100%)
NEG: N1,
N2, N3,
N4, N6,
G7, G13,
G16		 8/8 (88%) 8/8 (100%) 7/8 (88%) 7/8
(88%)		 7/8
(88%)		 8/8 (100%)
DIS: P2,
N5, N7,
G5, G10,
G11, G12,
G15		 7/8 (63%) 3/8 (not in
proposed
solution –
38%)		 Aut preocc:

4/8 (50%)		 7/8(88%) 8/8
(100%)		 7/8 (88%)
EXC: P4,
P7, G8,
G14		 4/4
(100%)		 4/4 (100%) 4/4 (100%) 4/4
(100%)		 4/4

(100%)		 4/4 (100%)
EMO:G1,
G2, G3,
G4, G6		 4/5 (80%) 4/5 (80%) Dysphoric: 5/5
(100%)		 4/5
(80%)		 5/5
(100%)		 5/5 (100%)