The Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences-Positive scale (CAPE-P15) accurately classifies and differentiates psychotic experience levels in adolescents from the general population.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in studying psychotic symptoms in non-clinical populations, with the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences-Positive scale (CAPE-P15) being one of the self-screening questionnaires used most commonly for this purpose. Further research is needed to evaluate the ability of the scale to accurately identify and classify positive psychotic experiences (PE) in the general population. AIM: To provide psychometric evidence about the accuracy of the CAPE-P15 for detecting PE in a sample of Chilean adolescents from the general population and classifying them according to their PE severity levels. METHOD: We administered the CAPE-P15 to a general sample of 1594 students aged 12 to 19. Based on Item Response Theory (IRT), we tested the accuracy of the instrument using two main parameters: difficulty and discrimination power of the 15 items. RESULTS: We found that the scale provides very accurate information about PE, particularly for high PE levels. The items with the highest capability to determine the presence of the latent trait were those assessing perceptual anomalies (auditory and visual hallucinations), bizarre experiences (a double has taken the place of others; being controlled by external forces), and persecutory ideation (conspiracy against me). CONCLUSIONS: The CAPE-P15 is an accurate and suitable tool to screen PE and to accurately classify and differentiate PE levels in adolescents from the general population. Further research is needed to better understand how maladaptive psychological mechanisms influence relationships between PE and suicidal ideation (SI) in the general population.

[Growth charts: Impact on the prevalence of nutritional disorders]. / Tablas de crecimiento: impacto sobre la prevalencia de los trastornos nutritivos.

INTRODUCTION: The references used to assess child growth in Spain are the graphs of the Orbegozo Foundation and the charts of the World Health Organization (WHO). The objective of this study is to analyze the differences between the two charts for weight, height and body mass index, and assess their relevance to identify growth or nutritional problems. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The values of the extreme percentiles of height, weight and body mass index for each sex from 0 to 10 years in both charts are compared. For each value Absolute differences and Z scores are calculated for each value. To evaluate the impact on the prevalence of the various nutritional or growth disorders the location of the value of the respective percentiles of in each of the charts were assessed. RESULTS: Significant differences were observed between the 3th percentile of height and weight, 97th of weight, and 85th and 97th of body mass index. Marked differences were observed for the extreme values of body mass index. During the first years, the Orbegozo charts overestimate the prevalence of malnutrition (between 2% and 19% depending on age and sex) compared to the WHO charts. In subsequent ages Orbegozo underestimates WHO between 0.7% and 2.89%. Orbegozo underestimates the prevalence of overweight (between 2.5% and 14.8%) compared to the WHO charts. The 97th percentile of Body mass index in the Orbegozo charts corresponds in most cases with WHO percentiles above 99.99%. CONCLUSION: The two charts analyzed have significant differences from a clinical and the public health point of view, in the estimation of overweight/obesity and malnutrition.

Propinox in intestinal colic: multicenter randomized prospective double-blind study of three doses of propinox vs. placebo in acute intestinal colic pain.

The aim of this double-blind study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of propinox administered i.v. and to establish a dose-response relationship according to three dose levels (10 mg, 20 mg and 30 mg), vs. placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe acute intestinal colic pain. Four hundred patients (100 per treatment group) were included and allocated to the following treatment groups: propinox 10 mg, 20 mg, 30 mg and placebo. All treatments induced significant and progressive pain reduction as from the 20 min evaluation of 20.3% in the placebo group, 45% in the group treated with propinox 10 mg; 52% in the group receiving propinox 20 mg and 56% in the propinox 30 mg group. Statistical comparison showed differences between placebo and the three active doses as well as between propinox 10 mg and the 20 mg and 30 mg doses. The 20 min evaluation revealed that 40% of patients receiving placebo had to be excluded from the study due to lack of efficacy; the percentage of which was significantly higher compared with those observed with the three doses of propinox ranging between 10% and 13%. The 120 min evaluation revealed that 47.7% of patients treated with propinox 10 mg were free from pain vs. 68.8% and 73.5% of those receiving 20 mg and 30 mg, respectively. These percentages were considerably higher than the 15% found with placebo. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between the 10 mg vs. the 20 mg and 30 mg groups with not differences between the latter doses. No differences in blood pressure or heart rate were found among treatments. The incidence of mouth dryness was significantly more frequent with the 20 mg and 30 mg doses of propinox than with the placebo or the 10 mg dose.