Cookie Notice

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Review our cookies information for more details.

Back to Top

New IPA Paper: NPS Criteria

IPA is pleased to announce the publication of a new paper:


Please see message below from lead author, Dr. Jeffrey Cummings, MD, ScD; Cleveland Clinic Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health, University of Nevada Las Vegas School of Integrated Health Sciences

As IPA members know, all things age – including diagnostic criteria.  With that in mind and with the increasing interest in defining populations for clinical research and trials with greater precision, an IPA work group was formed to re-assess the widely used and highly influential criteria for psychosis in Alzheimer’s disease authored by Dilip Jeste and Sandy Finkel in 2000.  The work group was comprised of multiple international stakeholders and experts and included contributions from Drs. Jeste and Finkel.  The IPA-led group reviewed the criteria and the relevant literature, conducted a survey of IPA members and members of affiliate organizations to assess how the criteria might be improved, developed revised consensus criteria, and conducted a second survey to assess the revisions. 

These updated criteria are published in the December issue of the American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (Criteria for Psychosis in Major and Mild Neurocognitive Disorders: International Psychogeriatric Association (IPA) Consensus Clinical and Research Definition). 

The main differences of the 2020 consensus criteria from the original 2000 definition are the adoption of the DSM5 terminology of Major and Mild Neurocognitive Disorder, extension of the definition of include mild Neurocognitive Disorder (e.g., mild cognitive impairment), provision of definitions and examples of hallucinations and delusions, descriptions of severity and impact of psychosis, expansion of excluded conditions that make the criteria inappropriate or difficult to apply, and removal of “negative symptoms” in favor of “apathy” in the accompanying conditions section. 

Ninety percent of the respondents to the second survey found the adjustments to be useful and approved of the revised consensus criteria.  Clear definitions of clinical phenotypes facilitate epidemiologic studies, clinical and translational research, and clinical trials.  The goals of the IPA work group in providing these consensus criteria are to enhance research, improve clinical diagnosis, and facilitate treatment development.  Prospective validation studies, real-world evidence regarding their application, and incorporation of more biomarker information are among the future expectations for these criteria.


Acadia Pharmaceuticals Axsome Cambridge University Press Cerevel Lundbeck Otsuka