Cited by 207Electroconvulsive Therapy StudiesSchizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and Psychiatry

Catatonia: Disappeared or Under-Diagnosed?

van der Heijden, F.M.M.A., Tuinier, S., Arts, N.J.M., Hoogendoorn, M.L.C., Kahn, R.S., Verhoeven, W.M.A.·2005·Psychopathology

Abstract

Background: Over the last century, especially during the latter half, the prevalence of the diagnosis of catatonic schizophrenia decreased considerably. Several explanations for this phenomenon have been put forward. Sampling and Methods: The present study investigated the frequency of the diagnosis of catatonic schizophrenia in a large sample of admitted psychiatric patients (n = 19,309). In addition, the presence of catatonic symptoms was studied in a sample of patients with schizophrenia (n = 701) and in a group of consecutively admitted psychotic patients (n = 139). In these two groups the effect of the diagnostic procedures on the recognition of catatonia was examined. Results: The diagnosis of catatonic schizophrenia dropped from 7.8% in 1980–1989 to 1.3% in 1990–2001 (p < 0.001). In addition, a possible under-diagnosis of catatonic schizophrenia was found in an independent sample of patients with schizophrenia. Application of a systematic catatonia rating scale in patients admitted with acute psychosis identified a bimodally distributed catatonic dimension. At least 18% of these patients fulfilled the criteria for catatonia. Interestingly, the catatonic subgroup used atypical antipsychotic compounds more frequently (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The results suggest that changes in diagnostic criteria and the diagnostic procedure itself are responsible for the under-recognition of catatonia.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000083964

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van der Heijden, F. M. M. A., Tuinier, S., Arts, N. J. M., Hoogendoorn, M. L. C., Kahn, R. S., & Verhoeven, W. M. A.
Affiliations
  • Wuhan Wudong Hospital (CN)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
Venue
Psychopathology
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2005
Volume
38
Issue
1
Pages
3-8
ISSN
  • 0254-4962 (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-033X
OpenAlex
W2019542000
Cited by
207
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 10
FWCI
3.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Eli Lilly and Company
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
catatonia, catatonic schizophrenia, underdiagnosis, diagnostic criteria, atypical antipsychotics, psychosis, psychiatric inpatients
MeSH terms
Adult, Catatonia, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Incidence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review