Cited by 2,342Schizophrenia research and treatmentPsychological Testing and AssessmentHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery, part 1: test selection, reliability, and validity

Nuechterlein, Keith H., Green, Michael F., Kern, Robert S., Baade, Lyle E., Barch, Deanna M., Cohen, Jonathan D., Essock, Susan, Fenton, Wayne S. +13 more·2008·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The lack of an accepted standard for measuring cognitive change in schizophrenia has been a major obstacle to regulatory approval of cognition-enhancing treatments. A primary mandate of the National Institute of Mental Health's Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) initiative was to develop a consensus cognitive battery for clinical trials of cognition-enhancing treatments for schizophrenia through a broadly based scientific evaluation of measures. METHOD: The MATRICS Neurocognition Committee evaluated more than 90 tests in seven cognitive domains to identify the 36 most promising measures. A separate expert panel evaluated the degree to which each test met specific selection criteria. Twenty tests were selected as a beta battery. The beta battery was administered to 176 individuals with schizophrenia and readministered to 167 of them 4 weeks later so that the 20 tests could be compared directly. RESULTS: The expert panel ratings are presented for the initially selected 36 tests. For the beta battery tests, data on test-retest reliability, practice effects, relationships to functional status, practicality, and tolerability are presented. Based on these data, 10 tests were selected to represent seven cognitive domains in the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery. CONCLUSIONS: The structured consensus method was a feasible and fair mechanism for choosing candidate tests, and direct comparison of beta battery tests in a common sample allowed selection of a final consensus battery. The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery is expected to be the standard tool for assessing cognitive change in clinical trials of cognition-enhancing drugs for schizophrenia. It may also aid evaluation of cognitive remediation strategies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07010042

Cites

31 of 31 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nuechterlein, K. H., Green, M. F., Kern, R. S., Baade, L. E., Barch, D. M., Cohen, J. D., Essock, S., Fenton, W. S., Frese, F. J., Gold, J. M., Goldberg, T., Heaton, R. K., Keefe, R. S. E., Kraemer, H., Mesholam-Gately, R., Seidman, L. J., Stover, E., Weinberger, D. R., Young, A. S., Zalcman, S., & Marder, S. R.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2008-02
Volume
165
Issue
2
Pages
203-213
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2165955750
Cited by
2,342
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 116 · 2025: 146 · 2024: 170 · 2023: 146 · 2022: 162 · 2021: 161 · 2020: 176 · 2019: 176 · 2018: 157 · 2017: 151 · 2016: 128 · 2015: 132 · 2014: 132 · 2013: 110 · 2012: 77
FWCI
46.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01mh022006-001)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (N01MH22006)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery, schizophrenia, cognitive function, cognitive remediation, test selection, test-retest reliability, practice effects, functional status, cognitive domain, clinical trial outcome measures
MeSH terms
Adult, Clinical Trials as Topic, Cognition, Cognition Disorders, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, National Institute of Mental Health (U.S.), Neuropsychological Tests, Psychometrics, Psychotic Disorders, Psychotropic Drugs, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, United States, Drug Design, Reproducibility of Results, Advisory Committees

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