Hewson C J, Luescher U A, Ball R O
Department of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Ontario.
Can J Vet Res. 1999 Jul;63(3):201-6.
This study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of formal diagnostic criteria for canine compulsive disorder (canine CD). Canine CD is a syndrome of abnormal behaviors that are believed to result from conflict or frustration. Differential diagnoses include normal conflict behavior and learned behavior. In studies of canine CD, confidence in the diagnosis comes with knowing the accuracy of the diagnostic method. This accuracy may be quantified as the chance-corrected agreement between the diagnostic method and a 'gold standard' diagnostic test. The present study examined the agreement between diagnoses of canine CD made by an expert (the 'gold standard') and by using formal diagnostic criteria. The owners of 84 dogs suspected of having CD received 2 telephone interviews. The first utilized a detailed, pre-tested questionnaire; a dog was then diagnosed with CD if the behavioral history met 7 diagnostic criteria. The second interview was given by a behavioral expert whose diagnosis was based on personal experience. The interviewers were blind to each other's diagnoses. The chance-corrected agreement between diagnoses was minimal (kappa = 0.02) and disagreement was associated with 3 of the formal criteria: a history of conflict or frustration, an increase in the number of contexts that elicit the behavior, and an increase in the daily frequency of the behavior. Reasons for the disagreement include the order of the interviews, response biases, the setting of the interviews, and, possibly, the diversity of the behaviors associated with canine CD. To the authors' knowledge, this type of study is the first in clinical ethology to address validation of the diagnostic method. The results indicate 3 developmental aspects of canine CD that should be examined in future work.
本研究评估了犬类强迫症（犬类CD）正式诊断标准的诊断准确性。犬类CD是一种异常行为综合征，被认为是由冲突或挫折引起的。鉴别诊断包括正常冲突行为和习得行为。在犬类CD的研究中，对诊断的信心来自于了解诊断方法的准确性。这种准确性可以量化为诊断方法与“金标准”诊断测试之间的机遇校正一致性。本研究检验了专家（“金标准”）做出的犬类CD诊断与使用正式诊断标准做出的诊断之间的一致性。84只疑似患有CD的犬只的主人接受了两次电话访谈。第一次访谈使用了一份详细的、经过预测试的问卷；如果行为病史符合7项诊断标准，则该犬被诊断为患有CD。第二次访谈由一位行为专家进行，其诊断基于个人经验。访谈者对彼此的诊断不知情。诊断之间的机遇校正一致性极小（kappa = 0.02），不一致与3项正式标准相关：冲突或挫折史、引发该行为的情境数量增加以及该行为的每日频率增加。不一致的原因包括访谈顺序、反应偏差、访谈环境，以及可能与犬类CD相关的行为多样性。据作者所知，这类研究在临床动物行为学中是首次涉及诊断方法的验证。结果表明了犬类CD在未来研究中应加以考察的3个发展方面。
