Stephens J H, Astrup C, Carpenter W T, Shaffer J W, Goldberg J
Psychiatry Res. 1982 Apr;6(2):127-43. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(82)90001-4.
The files of 283 hospitalized patients discharged with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective schizophrenia, or paranoid state were examined without knowledge of the patient's subsequent history. These patients, most of whom had originally been diagnosed by DSM-I criteria, were retrospectively diagnosed by New York Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC), the New Have Schizophrenia Index (NHSI), the St. Louis criteria, Taylor-Abrams 1978 criteria, Schneider's first-rank symptoms (FRS), the Washington IPSS 12-Point Flexible System, Astrup's process/nonprocess distinction, and DSM-III. Kappa values measuring pairwise diagnostic agreement amont the nine systems were typically low except among RDC, DSM-III, and St. Louis criteria. Long-term followup status was not significantly predicted by the FRS, NHSI, or Taylor-Abrams criteria. Diagnosis by means of the other systems, especially the Astrup process/nonprocess distinction, was significantly correlated with followup. However, Astrup's "process" schizophrenia is not operationally defined and could not be expected to be used with the degree of interrater reliability desired by researchers. On the other hand, of the operationally defined systems, DSM-III schizophrenia has the highest correlation with followup and is thus suggested for use by researchers desiring a highly homogeneous, although narrowly defined, population. Investigators wishing to cast a wider net could use a less restrictive system such as the RDC, with or without schizoaffectives included.
对283名出院诊断为精神分裂症、分裂情感性精神分裂症或偏执状态的住院患者的病历进行了检查,检查时并不了解患者随后的病史。这些患者大多最初是按照《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第一版(DSM-I)标准诊断的,之后采用纽约研究诊断标准(RDC)、纽黑文精神分裂症指数(NHSI)、圣路易斯标准、泰勒 - 艾布拉姆斯1978年标准、施奈德一级症状(FRS)、华盛顿IPSS 12分灵活系统、阿斯楚普的过程/非过程区分标准以及《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第三版(DSM-III)进行回顾性诊断。衡量九个系统之间两两诊断一致性的卡帕值通常较低,不过RDC、DSM-III和圣路易斯标准之间的一致性较高。FRS、NHSI或泰勒 - 艾布拉姆斯标准对长期随访状态并无显著预测作用。通过其他系统进行的诊断,尤其是阿斯楚普的过程/非过程区分标准,与随访结果显著相关。然而,阿斯楚普的“过程性”精神分裂症并未进行操作性定义,无法期望其能达到研究人员所期望的评分者间信度。另一方面,在有操作性定义的系统中,DSM-III精神分裂症与随访的相关性最高,因此建议希望研究高度同质(尽管定义狭窄)人群的研究人员使用。希望涵盖范围更广的研究人员可以使用限制较少的系统,如RDC,可包含或不包含分裂情感性障碍患者。