Morse Jennifer Q, Pilkonis Paul A
Department of Psychiatry, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
J Pers Disord. 2007 Apr;21(2):179-98. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2007.21.2.179.
A brief but valid self-report measure to screen for personality disorders (PDs) would be a valuable tool in making decisions about further assessment and in planning optimal treatments. In psychiatric and nonpsychiatric samples, we compared the validity of three screening measures: the PD scales from the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems, a self-report version of the Iowa Personality Disorder Screen, and the selfdirectedness scale of the Temperament and Character Inventory. Despite their different theoretical origins, the screeners were highly correlated in a range from .71 to .77. As a result, the use of multiple screeners was not a significant improvement over any individual screener, and no single screener stood out as clearly superior to the others. Each performed modestly in predicting the presence of any PD diagnosis in both the psychiatric and nonpsychiatric groups. Performance was best when predicting a more severe PD diagnosis in the psychiatric sample. The results also highlight the potential value of multiple assessments when relying on self-reports.
一种简短而有效的用于筛查人格障碍(PDs)的自我报告测量方法,将成为在做出进一步评估决策和规划最佳治疗方案时的一项宝贵工具。在精神病学和非精神病学样本中,我们比较了三种筛查方法的有效性:人际问题量表中的人格障碍量表、爱荷华人格障碍筛查的自我报告版本以及气质和性格量表中的自我导向性量表。尽管它们的理论起源不同,但这些筛查工具之间的相关性很高,范围在0.71至0.77之间。因此,使用多种筛查工具相较于任何单一筛查工具并没有显著改进,也没有一种单一筛查工具明显优于其他工具。在预测精神病学和非精神病学组中任何人格障碍诊断的存在时,每种工具的表现都一般。在预测精神病学样本中更严重的人格障碍诊断时,表现最佳。结果还凸显了在依赖自我报告时进行多次评估的潜在价值。