Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKvig, Erling Inge
dc.contributor.authorNilssen, Steinar
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-16T11:54:35Z
dc.date.available2023-08-16T11:54:35Z
dc.date.issued2023-04-03
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Increasingly, diagnostic assessments in clinical practice are made using structured diagnostic interviews or self-rating scales imported into clinical practice from research studies and big-scale surveys. Although structured diagnostic interviews have been shown to be highly reliable in research, the use of such method in clinical contexts are more questionable. In fact the validity and clinical utility of such methods in naturalistic contexts have rarely been evaluated. In this study we report on a replication study of Nordgaard et al (22) Assessing the diagnostic validity of a structured psychiatric interview in a first-admission hospital sample. World Psychiatry, 11 (3): 181–185.<p> <p>Methods: The study sample comprises 55 first-admitted inpatients to a treatment facility specializing in the assessment and treatment of patients with psychotic disorders. <p>Results: We found poor agreement between diagnoses generated by Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV and Best-estimate consensus diagnoses (κ value 0.21). <p>Discussion: We identified over-reliance on self-report, vulnerability to response set in dissimulating patients, and a strong diagnosis and comorbidity focus, as possible reasons for misdiagnosis with the SCID. We conclude that structured diagnostic interviews performed by mental health professionals without solid psychopathological knowledge and experience are not recommendable for clinical practice.en_US
dc.identifier.citationKvig, Nilssen. Does method matter? Assessing the validity and clinical utility of structured diagnostic interviews among a clinical sample of first-admitted patients with psychosis: A replication study. Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2023;14en_US
dc.identifier.cristinIDFRIDAID 2155830
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1076299
dc.identifier.issn1664-0640
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10037/29984
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherFrontiers Mediaen_US
dc.relation.journalFrontiers in Psychiatry
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2023 The Author(s)en_US
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0en_US
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)en_US
dc.titleDoes method matter? Assessing the validity and clinical utility of structured diagnostic interviews among a clinical sample of first-admitted patients with psychosis: A replication studyen_US
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typeTidsskriftartikkelen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US


File(s) in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)