Cantrell J D, Dana R H
J Clin Psychol. 1987 Jul;43(4):366-75. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198707)43:4<366::aid-jclp2270430405>3.0.co;2-p.
Comparison of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI) and clinician-generated DSM-III diagnoses for a sample of psychiatric outpatients (N = 72) indicated only chance agreement. The MCMI was of limited use as a screening device because of overdiagnosis and failure to identify individuals who prematurely terminated treatment. Other potential problems with the instrument included substantial intercorrelation among scales and possible pathologizing of stereotypic feminine traits. The characteristic structure of the MCMI appeared stable across patient samples; there was evidence for identification of a mean profile for psychiatric patients who voluntarily seek treatment for subjective distress.
对72名精神科门诊患者样本进行的米隆临床多轴问卷（MCMI）与临床医生根据《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第三版（DSM-III）做出的诊断比较显示，二者仅存在随机一致性。由于过度诊断以及未能识别出过早终止治疗的个体，MCMI作为一种筛查工具的用途有限。该工具的其他潜在问题包括各量表之间存在大量相互关联以及可能将刻板的女性特质视为病态。MCMI的特征结构在不同患者样本中似乎较为稳定；有证据表明，对于因主观痛苦而自愿寻求治疗的精神科患者，可以识别出一个平均概况。
