Morey Leslie C, Benson Kathryn T
Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.
J Pers Disord. 2016 Feb;30(1):130-44. doi: 10.1521/pedi_2015_29_188. Epub 2015 Apr 23.
In an initial investigation by Morey and Ochoa (1989), adherence to DSM-III personality disorder diagnostic criteria was examined as an agreement rate between clinician (global) diagnoses and diagnoses algorithmically generated from DSM-III criteria rules. Morey and Ochoa (1989) findings suggested significant clinician-criterion diagnostic incongruity, a result that cross-validated in a DSM-III-R replication performed by Blashfield and Herkov (1996). The current study examined such adherence, utilizing DSM-IV decision rules, in a national sample of 337 clinicians and their target patients. The results of the current study are largely consistent with the earlier findings, with clinician-criterion agreement rates comparable to those commonly reported for interdiagnostician reliability. Ramifications for the future of personality disorder diagnostic classification are discussed.
在莫雷和奥乔亚（1989年）的初步调查中，对DSM-III人格障碍诊断标准的遵循情况被视作临床医生（整体）诊断与根据DSM-III标准规则通过算法得出的诊断之间的一致率进行了检验。莫雷和奥乔亚（1989年）的研究结果表明临床医生与标准诊断之间存在显著不一致，这一结果在布拉什菲尔德和赫科夫（1996年）进行的DSM-III-R重复研究中得到了验证。本研究利用DSM-IV决策规则，在一个由337名临床医生及其目标患者组成的全国性样本中检验了这种遵循情况。本研究的结果在很大程度上与早期研究结果一致，临床医生与标准的一致率与通常报道的诊断医生间可靠性的一致率相当。文中还讨论了人格障碍诊断分类未来的影响。
