• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

九种精神分裂症诊断系统的比较。

A comparison of nine systems to diagnose schizophrenia.

作者信息

Stephens J H, Astrup C, Carpenter W T, Shaffer J W, Goldberg J

出版信息

Psychiatry Res. 1982 Apr;6(2):127-43. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(82)90001-4.

DOI:10.1016/0165-1781(82)90001-4
PMID:6953455
Abstract

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.

摘要

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。

相似文献

1
A comparison of nine systems to diagnose schizophrenia.九种精神分裂症诊断系统的比较。
Psychiatry Res. 1982 Apr;6(2):127-43. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(82)90001-4.
2
Diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia: prognostic implications and diagnostic overlap.
Psychiatry Res. 1980 Mar;2(1):1-12. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(80)90002-5.
3
A major flaw in the diagnosis of schizophrenia: what happened to the Schneider's first rank symptoms.精神分裂症诊断中的一个主要缺陷:施耐德一级症状怎么了。
Psychol Med. 2020 Jul;50(9):1409-1417. doi: 10.1017/S0033291720001816. Epub 2020 Jun 11.
4
Long-term course of schizophrenic illness: Bleuler's study reconsidered.精神分裂症的长期病程:对布鲁勒研究的重新审视
Am J Psychiatry. 2003 Dec;160(12):2202-8. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.160.12.2202.
5
Schneider's first rank symptoms of schizophrenia in Kenyan patients.肯尼亚患者中精神分裂症的施奈德首级症状
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983 Mar;67(3):148-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb00335.x.
6
Heterogeneity of delusional syndromes: diagnostic criteria and course prognosis.妄想综合征的异质性:诊断标准与病程预后
Psychopathology. 1984;17(5-6):280-9. doi: 10.1159/000284063.
7
[Polydiagnostic approach to schizophrenia. Validation of a computerized checklist (Diagnostic and Prognostic Scales)].[精神分裂症的多诊断方法。计算机化清单(诊断与预后量表)的验证]
Encephale. 1994 Mar-Apr;20(2):91-101.
8
Bizarre delusions and first-rank symptoms in a first-admission sample: a preliminary analysis of prevalence and correlates.首次入院样本中的怪异妄想和一级症状:患病率及相关因素的初步分析
Compr Psychiatry. 1995 Nov-Dec;36(6):428-34. doi: 10.1016/s0010-440x(95)90250-3.
9
Positive and negative symptoms in schizophrenia.精神分裂症的阳性和阴性症状。
Psychiatry Res. 1984 Dec;13(4):277-84. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(84)90075-1.
10
A plea for paraphrenia.对类偏狂的呼吁。
Can J Psychiatry. 1991 Nov;36(9):667-72. doi: 10.1177/070674379103600908.

引用本文的文献

1
Ten-year outcomes in first episode psychotic major depression patients compared with schizophrenia and bipolar patients.首发精神病性重度抑郁症患者与精神分裂症和双相情感障碍患者的十年结局比较。
Schizophr Res. 2016 Oct;176(2-3):417-422. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2016.04.049. Epub 2016 May 26.
2
First rank symptoms for schizophrenia.精神分裂症的一级症状。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 25;1(1):CD010653. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010653.pub2.
3
The special treatment of first rank auditory hallucinations and bizarre delusions in the diagnosis of schizophrenia.
精神分裂症诊断中一级幻听和奇特妄想的特殊处理。
Schizophr Res. 2013 May;146(1-3):17-21. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2013.02.040. Epub 2013 Mar 22.
4
Diagnostic and prognostic significance of Schneiderian first-rank symptoms: a 20-year longitudinal study of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.Schneider 一级症状的诊断和预后意义:精神分裂症和双相情感障碍 20 年的纵向研究。
Compr Psychiatry. 2011 Mar-Apr;52(2):126-31. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2010.06.005. Epub 2010 Sep 9.
5
The diagnostic status of first-rank symptoms.一级症状的诊断状况。
Schizophr Bull. 2008 Jan;34(1):137-54. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbm044. Epub 2007 Jun 11.
6
Competing definitions of schizophrenia: what can be learned from polydiagnostic studies?精神分裂症的相互竞争的定义:从多诊断研究中可以学到什么?
Schizophr Bull. 2007 Sep;33(5):1178-200. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbl065. Epub 2006 Dec 8.
7
Exploring boundaries of schizophrenia: a comparison of ICD-10 with other diagnostic systems in first-admitted patients.探索精神分裂症的界限:首次入院患者中ICD - 10与其他诊断系统的比较
World Psychiatry. 2002 Jun;1(2):109-14.
8
Diagnosing borderline. A contribution to the question of its conceptual validity.边缘性诊断。对其概念效度问题的一项贡献。
Arch Psychiatr Nervenkr (1970). 1983;233(5):359-70. doi: 10.1007/BF00346086.