Comparison of exploratory eye tracking movement between patients with schizophrenia and affective disorder

韩永华,王丽莉,朱日升,刘粹,周凤,吕淑艳,王秀丽,小岛卓也,松岛英介,沈渔村
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1673-8225.2004.27.063
2004-01-01
Abstract:Aim: To explore the difference of exploratory eye tracking movement (EETM) among patients with schizophrenia, affective disorder and normal controls, and its clinical significance in psychological medicine. Methods: A total of 498 patients with schizophrenia and 110 with affective disorders, who were in accordance with the diagnostic criteria of the tenth edition of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and the second edition of Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders (revised), and 81 normal controls received examinations by using the eye tracking movement labeling recorder (MODEL IV, provided by Japan). The results of discriminant analysis (D score = 10.265 - 0.065 × point of eyeball fixation + 0.871 × reactive exploratory score) were used to analyze their sensitivity and validity to D scores. Patients with positive score of DA were diagnosed to have schizophrenia, and those with negative scores had no schizophrenia. The differences of EETM among the patients with schizophrenia, affective disorder and the normal controls were compared. Results: Among the 498 patients with schizophrenia, 386 cases had positive score and 112 cases had negative score respectively and the sensitivity of schizophrenia to the D score was 77.5%. There were insignificant differences in the indexes of EETM between the positive and negative symptoms in the patients with schizophrenia (t = 0.08 to 1.36, P > 0.05). Among the 110 patients with affective disorder, 70 cases had positive score and 40 cases had negative score, and the specialty of affective disorder to the D score was 36.4%. Seven cases had positive score and 74 cases with negative score in the 81 cases of the normal control group, and its specialty to the D score was 91.4%. The indexes of EETM in the normal control group had very significant differences from those in the schizophrenia group and affective disorder group (t = 3.31 to 17.00, P < 0.01). Conclusion: The EETM for schizophrenia had higher sensitivity, and were not affected by the different symptoms of schizophrenia. EETM is important in the assistant diagnosis for schizophrenia.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?