Segal D L, Hersen M, Van Hasselt V B
Center for Psychological Studies, Nova University, Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Compr Psychiatry. 1994 Jul-Aug;35(4):316-27. doi: 10.1016/0010-440x(94)90025-6.
Research evaluating the reliability of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID) is reviewed. Reliability procedures and studies are examined. Several versions of the SCID are covered, including the SCID-I (axis I disorders), SCID-II (axis II disorders), SCID-Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (SCID-PANSS; functional-dimensional assessment for psychotic disorders), and SCID-Upjohn Version (panic disorder). The SCID has been found to yield highly reliable diagnoses for most axis I and axis II disorders. Suggestions for future research on the SCID are offered, particularly with respect to (1) the lack of studies in which SCID diagnoses are compared with diagnoses from unstructured interviews or other structured-interview formats, and (2) the need for a more natural evaluation of this instrument. Also, the importance of establishing norms and obtaining reliability data for underserved clinical populations is discussed.
对评估《精神疾病诊断与统计手册第三版修订本》（DSM-III-R）结构化临床访谈（SCID）可靠性的研究进行了综述。对可靠性程序和研究进行了考察。涵盖了SCID的多个版本，包括SCID-I（轴I障碍）、SCID-II（轴II障碍）、SCID阳性和阴性症状量表（SCID-PANSS；精神障碍的功能维度评估）以及SCID-Upjohn版本（惊恐障碍）。已发现SCID对大多数轴I和轴II障碍能得出高度可靠的诊断。提出了关于SCID未来研究的建议，特别是针对以下方面：（1）缺乏将SCID诊断与非结构化访谈或其他结构化访谈形式的诊断进行比较的研究，以及（2）需要对该工具进行更自然的评估。此外，还讨论了为服务不足的临床人群建立规范并获取可靠性数据的重要性。
