Validity and reliability of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the BACS (Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia)

Authors

  • Geovany Eliberto Araújo Federal University of Minas Gerais; Neuroscience Post-Graduation Program
  • Camilo Brandão de Resende Hospital Foundation of the State of Minas Gerais
  • Ana Cecília Alves Cardoso Hospital Foundation of the State of Minas Gerais
  • Antonio Lúcio Teixeira Federal University of Minas Gerais; Clinical Medicine
  • Richard S.E. Keefe Duke University Medical Center; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences
  • João Vinícius Salgado Federal University of Minas Gerais; Department of Morphology

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2015(04)10

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity and reliability of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia by examining its temporal stability, internal consistency, and discriminant and convergent validity. METHODS: The Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia was administered to 116 stable patients with schizophrenia and 58 matched control subjects. To assess concurrent validity, a subset of patients underwent a traditional neuropsychological assessment. RESULTS: The patients with schizophrenia performed significantly worse than the controls (p;0.8). The internal consistency of the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia was high (Cronbach's α  ϝ 0.874). CONCLUSION: The Brazilian Portuguese version of the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia exhibits good reliability and discriminant and concurrent validity and is a promising tool for easily assessing cognitive impairment in schizophrenia and for comparing the performance of Brazilian patients with that of patients from other countries.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2015-04-01

Issue

Section

Clinical Sciences

How to Cite

Validity and reliability of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the BACS (Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia). (2015). Clinics, 70(4), 278-282. https://doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2015(04)10