• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI-Auto): problems and remedies for diagnosing panic disorder and social phobia.复合国际诊断访谈(CIDI-自动版):惊恐障碍和社交恐惧症诊断中的问题与解决方法
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2003;12(4):167-81. doi: 10.1002/mpr.154.
2
Procedural validity of the computerized version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI-Auto) in the anxiety disorders.计算机化综合国际诊断访谈(CIDI-Auto)在焦虑症中的程序效度
Psychol Med. 1995 Nov;25(6):1269-80. doi: 10.1017/s0033291700033237.
3
Validation of the diagnoses of panic disorder and phobic disorders in the US National Comorbidity Survey Replication Adolescent (NCS-A) supplement.验证惊恐障碍和恐惧症在全美共病调查青少年增补版(NCS-A)中的诊断。
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2011 Jun;20(2):105-15. doi: 10.1002/mpr.336.
4
A comparison of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI-Auto) with clinical assessment in diagnosing mood and anxiety disorders.《复合国际诊断访谈量表(自动版)》(CIDI-Auto)与临床评估在诊断心境障碍和焦虑障碍中的比较
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2001 Apr;35(2):224-30. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1614.2001.00868.x.
5
Reliability and procedural validity of UM-CIDI DSM-III-R phobic disorders.《UM-CIDI DSM-III-R 恐惧症的信度与程序效度》
Psychol Med. 1996 Nov;26(6):1169-77. doi: 10.1017/s0033291700035893.
6
Distinguishing panic disorder and agoraphobia from social phobia.区分惊恐障碍和场所恐惧症与社交恐惧症。
J Nerv Ment Dis. 1994 Nov;182(11):611-7. doi: 10.1097/00005053-199411000-00003.
7
An examination of syndromal validity and diagnostic subtypes in social phobia and panic disorder.社交恐惧症和惊恐障碍的综合征效度及诊断亚型研究。
J Clin Psychiatry. 1992 Jan;53(1):23-7.
8
On the threshold of disorder: a study of the impact of the DSM-IV clinical significance criterion on diagnosing depressive and anxiety disorders in clinical practice.处于疾病临界状态:一项关于《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版临床意义标准对临床实践中抑郁和焦虑症诊断影响的研究
J Clin Psychiatry. 2004 Oct;65(10):1400-5.
9
A brief Web-based screening questionnaire for common mental disorders: development and validation.一种基于网络的常见精神障碍简短筛查问卷:编制与验证
J Med Internet Res. 2009 Jul 24;11(3):e19. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1134.
10
The relationship of agoraphobia and panic in a community sample of adolescents and young adults.青少年和青年社区样本中广场恐惧症与惊恐障碍的关系。
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998 Nov;55(11):1017-24. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.55.11.1017.

引用本文的文献

1
Are male and female responses to social phobia diagnostic criteria comparable?男性和女性对社交恐惧症诊断标准的反应是否可比?
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2012 Sep;21(3):222-31. doi: 10.1002/mpr.1363. Epub 2012 Aug 13.
2
Predictors of clinical improvement in a randomized effectiveness trial for primary care patients with panic disorder.针对惊恐障碍基层医疗患者的随机有效性试验中临床改善的预测因素。
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2009 Oct;197(10):715-21. doi: 10.1097/NMD.0b013e3181b97d4d.
3
Prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders in women with systemic lupus erythematosus.系统性红斑狼疮女性患者中情绪和焦虑障碍的患病率
Arthritis Rheum. 2009 Jun 15;61(6):822-9. doi: 10.1002/art.24519.
4
Prevalence and risk factors of threshold and sub-threshold psychiatric disorders in primary care.基层医疗中阈下及阈上精神障碍的患病率及危险因素
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2008 Mar;43(3):184-91. doi: 10.1007/s00127-007-0286-9. Epub 2007 Nov 16.
5
A randomized effectiveness trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy and medication for primary care panic disorder.一项针对初级保健惊恐障碍的认知行为疗法与药物治疗的随机疗效试验。
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Mar;62(3):290-8. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.3.290.

本文引用的文献

1
Moving treatment research from clinical trials to the real world.将治疗研究从临床试验推广至现实世界。
Psychiatr Serv. 2003 Mar;54(3):327-32. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.54.3.327.
2
Predictors of willingness to consider medication and psychosocial treatment for panic disorder in primary care patients.
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2002 Sep-Oct;24(5):316-21. doi: 10.1016/s0163-8343(02)00204-9.
3
A general population comparison of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and the Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry (SCAN).综合国际诊断访谈(CIDI)与神经精神病学临床评估量表(SCAN)在普通人群中的比较。
Psychol Med. 2001 Aug;31(6):1001-13. doi: 10.1017/s0033291701004184.
4
A comparison of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI-Auto) with clinical assessment in diagnosing mood and anxiety disorders.《复合国际诊断访谈量表(自动版)》(CIDI-Auto)与临床评估在诊断心境障碍和焦虑障碍中的比较
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2001 Apr;35(2):224-30. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1614.2001.00868.x.
5
Psychometric properties of the Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN). New self-rating scale.社交恐惧症量表(SPIN)的心理测量特性。新的自评量表。
Br J Psychiatry. 2000 Apr;176:379-86. doi: 10.1192/bjp.176.4.379.
6
Predictors of panic attacks in adolescents.青少年惊恐发作的预测因素。
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2000 Feb;39(2):207-14. doi: 10.1097/00004583-200002000-00021.
7
Are computerized interviews equivalent to human interviewers? CIDI-Auto versus CIDI in anxiety and depressive disorders.计算机化访谈与人工访谈员等效吗?用于焦虑症和抑郁症的计算机化国际综合诊断访谈(CIDI-Auto)与国际综合诊断访谈(CIDI)的比较
Psychol Med. 1998 Jul;28(4):893-901. doi: 10.1017/s0033291798006655.
8
The psychometric properties of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview.《综合国际诊断访谈》的心理测量特性。
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 1998 Feb;33(2):80-8. doi: 10.1007/s001270050026.
9
Computerised diagnosis in acute psychiatry: validity of CIDI-Auto against routine clinical diagnosis.急性精神病学中的计算机诊断:CIDI-Auto相对于常规临床诊断的效度
J Psychiatr Res. 1997 Sep-Oct;31(5):581-92. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3956(97)00032-0.
10
Multicenter collaborative panic disorder severity scale.多中心协作惊恐障碍严重程度量表。
Am J Psychiatry. 1997 Nov;154(11):1571-5. doi: 10.1176/ajp.154.11.1571.

复合国际诊断访谈(CIDI-自动版):惊恐障碍和社交恐惧症诊断中的问题与解决方法

The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI-Auto): problems and remedies for diagnosing panic disorder and social phobia.

作者信息

Means-Christensen Adrienne, Sherbourne Cathy D, Roy-Byrne Peter, Craske Michelle G, Bystritsky Alexander, Stein Murray B

机构信息

University of California, San Diego, CA 92037, USA.

出版信息

Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2003;12(4):167-81. doi: 10.1002/mpr.154.

DOI:10.1002/mpr.154
PMID:14657973
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6878399/
Abstract

In a recent study of treatment for panic disorder in primary care, the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI-Auto) was used to provide psychiatric diagnoses. However, during and after data collection, it was discovered that the CIDI appeared to place, or fail to place, a substantial number of people into diagnostic categories in ways that conflicted with the investigators' clinical experience. The wording of questions in the panic module, coupled with a lack of structured follow-up probes, resulted in apparent false negatives for panic disorder. Moreover, patients who would otherwise meet criteria for panic disorder or social phobia did not receive a diagnosis based on rules that may be discordant with clinical practice and, at times, the design of the DSM-IV. For this study, changes were made to the interview, including additional probes for the panic disorder module and modification of the decision rules used to assign or rule out diagnoses of panic disorder and social phobia. The changes resulted in greater inclusion of patients in the panic disorder and social phobia diagnostic categories and we argue that these changes to the CIDI-Auto increase the clinical validity of this instrument. We did not examine the false positive rate for the unmodified or modified CIDI, but this is an important issue that needs to be evaluated in future research.

摘要

在最近一项针对初级保健中惊恐障碍治疗的研究中,使用了综合国际诊断访谈(CIDI - Auto)来进行精神疾病诊断。然而,在数据收集期间及之后,发现CIDI似乎以与研究者临床经验相冲突的方式,将大量人员归入或未归入诊断类别。惊恐模块中的问题措辞,加上缺乏结构化的后续追问,导致惊恐障碍出现明显的假阴性。此外,那些原本符合惊恐障碍或社交恐惧症标准的患者,根据可能与临床实践以及有时与《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM - IV)设计不一致的规则,未得到诊断。对于本研究,对访谈进行了修改,包括对惊恐障碍模块增加追问,以及修改用于确定或排除惊恐障碍和社交恐惧症诊断的决策规则。这些改变使得更多患者被纳入惊恐障碍和社交恐惧症诊断类别,我们认为对CIDI - Auto的这些改变提高了该工具的临床有效性。我们未考察未修改或修改后的CIDI的假阳性率,但这是一个重要问题,需要在未来研究中进行评估。