Kovess V, Fournier L
Psychosocial Research Unit, Douglas Hospital, Québec, Canada.
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 1990 Jul;25(4):179-86. doi: 10.1007/BF00782958.
The Epidemiological Catchment Area (ECA) program is a major step in psychiatric epidemiology because it uses a structured interview: the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS). This gives psychiatric diagnoses in different diagnostic systems and can be administered by lay interviewers. However many surveys on health-related topics cannot give the time needed to administer the DIS and train the personnel to use such a complex schedule as the DIS. The DISSA is a self-administered abridged form of the DIS and represents an effort to produce a short and simple instrument for three types of diagnoses: major depressive disorder, all anxiety disorders (generalized anxiety, phobias, panic) and alcohol disorders. In this paper we describe the DISSA and give preliminary evidence about its efficiency. This will be done by comparing DISSA results with clinicians judgments, the DIS and a checklist derived from HSC. The DISSA functions in a manner similar to its parent instrument but achieves this in a shorter and less costly mode. Actually the approach by episode used for assessing depression seems to work better than the DIS. Comparisons with the checklist show a clear superiority of the DISSA for depression, alcohol and anxiety disorders but not for generalized anxiety.
流行病学集水区（ECA）项目是精神疾病流行病学领域的一项重大举措，因为它采用了一种结构化访谈：诊断访谈表（DIS）。这能得出不同诊断系统下的精神疾病诊断结果，且可由非专业访谈人员进行操作。然而，许多与健康相关主题的调查无法提供使用DIS并培训人员使用如此复杂的访谈表所需的时间。DISSA是DIS的一种自我管理简化形式，旨在制作一种简短、简单的工具，用于三种类型的诊断：重度抑郁症、所有焦虑症（广泛性焦虑症、恐惧症、恐慌症）和酒精使用障碍。在本文中，我们描述了DISSA，并给出了其有效性的初步证据。这将通过将DISSA的结果与临床医生的判断、DIS以及从健康与社会关怀调查（HSC）得出的清单进行比较来完成。DISSA的运作方式与其母工具类似，但以更简短、成本更低的方式实现。实际上，用于评估抑郁症的按发作情况进行评估的方法似乎比DIS效果更好。与清单的比较表明，DISSA在抑郁症、酒精使用障碍和焦虑症方面明显优于清单，但在广泛性焦虑症方面并非如此。
