Suppr超能文献

巴西版综合国际诊断访谈(CIDI 2.1)的效度与局限性。

Validity and limitations of the Brazilian version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 2.1).

作者信息

Quintana Maria Inês, Gastal Fábio Leite, Jorge Miguel Roberto, Miranda Cláudio Torres, Andreoli Sérgio Baxter

机构信息

Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

出版信息

Braz J Psychiatry. 2007 Mar;29(1):18-22.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To study the concurrent validity of the Brazilian Composite International Diagnostic Interview 2.1 using as gold standard the clinical diagnoses based on the ICD-10 criteria and the Longitudinal, Expert, All Data (LEAD) procedure.

METHOD

The sample was composed of 185 subjects selected at psychiatric hospitals, psychiatric outpatient units, the community, and primary care services. These individuals were intentionally selected according to 9 diagnostic groups.

INSTRUMENTS

Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI-core) version 2.1 (paper-and-pencil) administered by 16 trained interviewers.

ANALYSIS

concurrent validity of diagnoses of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 12-month.

RESULTS

Values found for sensitivity and specificity in each diagnosis were: alcohol-related disorders (79.5%/97.2%); psychoactive substance-related disorders (77.3%/100%); schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders (28.6%/93.9%); manic episode and bipolar affective disorder (38.9%/96.4%); depressive disorder (82.5%/ 93.8%); phobic-anxiety disorder (80.6%/93.5%); obsessive-compulsive disorder (18.2%/98.9%); somatoform disorder (41.7%/90.8%); eating disorder (45.5%/100.0%).

CONCLUSION

The Composite International Diagnostic Interview proved to be valid for diagnoses of alcohol-related disorders, psychoactive substance-related disorders, depressive disorder and phobic-anxiety disorder. The probable explanations for the poor performance for the other diagnoses were: necessity of some clinical judgement by the lay interviewer; difficulty to use the Probe Flow Chart; interviewees' difficulty of understanding; and lack of mechanisms to certify the veracity of the information.

摘要

目的

以基于国际疾病分类第十版(ICD - 10)标准的临床诊断及纵向、专家、全数据(LEAD)程序作为金标准,研究巴西版复合国际诊断访谈2.1的同时效度。

方法

样本由185名从精神病医院、精神科门诊、社区及初级保健服务机构选取的受试者组成。这些个体根据9个诊断组进行有意选取。

工具

由16名经过培训的访谈员实施的复合国际诊断访谈(CIDI - 核心)2.1版(纸笔形式)。

分析

复合国际诊断访谈12个月诊断的同时效度。

结果

各诊断中敏感性和特异性的值分别为:酒精相关障碍(79.5%/97.2%);精神活性物质相关障碍(77.3%/100%);精神分裂症及其他精神病性障碍(28.6%/93.9%);躁狂发作及双相情感障碍(38.9%/96.4%);抑郁障碍(82.5%/93.8%);恐惧焦虑障碍(80.6%/93.5%);强迫症(18.2%/98.9%);躯体形式障碍(41.7%/90.8%);进食障碍(45.5%/100.0%)。

结论

复合国际诊断访谈被证明对酒精相关障碍、精神活性物质相关障碍、抑郁障碍及恐惧焦虑障碍的诊断有效。其他诊断表现不佳的可能原因是:非专业访谈员需要一些临床判断;使用探查流程图有困难;受访者理解困难;以及缺乏核实信息真实性的机制。

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