Suppr超能文献

人格诊断问卷 4+ 在临床实践中作为筛查工具没有用处。

Personality diagnostic questionnaire 4+ is not useful as a screener in clinical practice.

机构信息

PsyQ Beverwijk, PsyQ, Den Haag, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Clin Psychol Psychother. 2013 Jan-Feb;20(1):49-54. doi: 10.1002/cpp.766. Epub 2011 Jul 19.

Abstract

In clinical practice, the combination of brief, cost effective, valid and reliable assessment of personality disorders (PDs) is highly important. Substantial budget cuts require optimal use of the clinician's time. PDs are related with high axis I comorbidity, poorer therapy outcome and increased health service costs. In an effort to find a screening questionnaire that meets both the demands of cost-effectiveness and methodological soundness, we investigated the use of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire 4+ (PDQ-4+) as a first step in a two-step diagnostic procedure. As the second step, we used the Structured Clinical Interview of DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders (SCID-II) as criterion measure. Our results show that the positive predictive power of the PDQ-4+ is rather low, resulting in a large number of false positives. Therefore, its added value is poor in comparison with administering the SCID-II in the first place. Also, the value of the two validity scales of the PDQ-4+ is highly questionable. We therefore conclude that the PDQ-4+ should not be used in clinical practice as a screening instrument for PD assessment.

摘要

在临床实践中,对人格障碍(PD)进行简短、经济有效、有效且可靠的评估非常重要。大量预算削减要求临床医生最佳利用时间。PD 与较高的 I 轴共病、较差的治疗效果和增加的医疗服务成本有关。为了找到既符合成本效益又符合方法学要求的筛查问卷,我们研究了使用人格诊断问卷 4+(PDQ-4+)作为两步诊断程序的第一步。作为第二步,我们使用 DSM-IV 轴 II 人格障碍的结构化临床访谈(SCID-II)作为标准测量。我们的结果表明,PDQ-4+的阳性预测力相当低,导致大量假阳性。因此,与首先使用 SCID-II 相比,其附加值很差。此外,PDQ-4+的两个效度量表的价值也存在很大疑问。因此,我们得出结论,PDQ-4+不应在临床实践中用作 PD 评估的筛查工具。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验