Effectiveness of a social cognition remediation intervention for patients with schizophrenia: a randomized-controlled study

Table 2 Comparisons on demographic and clinical variables at baseline between subjects recruited at Naples and Milan

	Naples (n = 27)	Milan (n = 13)	t- χ²/p- value
Age	34.07 ± 8.48	42.85 ± 9.29	2.972/0.005^*
Gender (M/F)	18/9	10/3	0.440/0.507
Education (years)	11.59 ± 2.24	12.69 ± 2.06	1.491/0.144
PANSS positive	8.56 ± 2.55	7.23 ± 2.77	1.497/0.143
PANSS negative	12.11 ± 5.12	9.62 ± 4.17	1.526/0.135
PANSS disorganization	2.52 ± 1.25	2.46 ± 0.78	0.150/0.881
MCCB neurocognitive composite score	24.13 ± 13.28	37.54 ± 10.33	3.137/0.004^*
FEIT total score	32.11 ± 9.77	41.38 ± 5.12	3.202/0.003^*
TASIT—emotion evaluation test	21.63 ± 6.09	23.38 ± 3.33	0.967/0.339
TASIT—minimal social inference	35.93 ± 12.12	43.77 ± 10.45	1.999/0.053
TASIT enriched social inference	33.59 ± 12.66	43.38 ± 7.30	2.579/0.014^*
UPSA total score	64.07 ± 22.71	66.00 ± 16.03	0.274/0.786
SLOF interpersonal relationships	22.70 ± 4.78	24.85 ± 5.83	1.236/0.224
SLOF everyday life skills	46.85 ± 4.90	45.69 ± 6.56	0.627/0.534
SLOF work skills	20.93 ± 4.49	19.69 ± 5.23	0.771/0.445

Mean ± Standard Deviation for age, years of education, and the scores of PANSS, SLOF, UPSA, MCCB, FEIT and TASIT; frequency for gender
PANSS Positive And Negative Symptom Scale, MCCB MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery, FEIT Facial Emotion Identification Test, TASIT The Awareness of Social Inference Test, UPSA UCSD Performance-based Skills Assessment, SLOF Specific Levels Of Functioning
^*The difference does not remain significant after controlling for multiple tests
^**Statistically significant difference between groups after Bonferroni correction for multiple tests (p < 0.003)

ISSN: 1744-859X