You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 43 No. 7, July 1986 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  REGULAR DEPARTMENTS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Assessment of Evidence for a Categorical View of Schizophrenia-Reply

C. ROBERT CLONINGER, MD
Department of Psychiatry Jewish Hospital of St Louis 216 S Kingshighway Blvd PO Box 14109 St Louis, MO 63178 RONALD L. MARTIN, MD Department of Psychiatry University of Kansas Medical Center Kansas City

SAMUEL B. GUZE, MD
Department of Psychiatry Washington University School of Medicine St Louis

PAULA J. CLAYTON, MD
Department of Psychiatry University of Minnesota Minneapolis

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1986;43(7):713-714.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

n Reply.—

Psychiatric classification remains a major problem because it must still be inferred from semiquantitative ratings of clinical phenomena. Much the same problem confronted biologists attempting to distinguish discrete species on the basis of morphology in the late 19th century, resulting in many inconsistent classifications. Then, in 1894, Karl Pearson developed statistical methods to identify subpopulations from a heterogeneous mixture.1 The existence of two subgroups can be inferred under some conditions when quantitative data have a bimodal distribution, ie, two peaks separated by an intermediate point of rarity. Later, many species were successfully distinguished in this way.2 However, bimodality may also arise from a variety of measurement and selection artifacts, such as the arbitrary exclusion of intermediate cases or the pooling of nonrandom subsamples of extreme cases.3 Accordingly, the inference of multiple discrete disorders from quantitative data requires careful attention to experimental design and statistical analysis. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1986 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.