Guthrie P C, Mobley B D
Midwestern State University.
J Clin Psychol. 1994 Jul;50(4):656-65. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(199407)50:4<656::aid-jclp2270500425>3.0.co;2-v.
This study was a comparison of the relative diagnostic efficiency of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-II, the MMPI Personality Disorder Scales, and the Personality Disorder Questionnaire-Revised. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R, Axis II was used as the criterion measure. The operating characteristics of all three objective instruments revealed a high rate of false-positive diagnoses, but negative test results were generally valid. Each instrument was found to possess clinical utility in its ability to improve diagnostic efficiency over base rate predictions for most disorders. It is suggested that many of the psychometric limitations revealed in this study reflect the limitations of DSM-III-R, Axis II.
本研究比较了米隆临床多轴问卷第二版、明尼苏达多相人格调查表人格障碍量表以及修订版人格障碍问卷的相对诊断效率。以《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第三版修订本轴II的结构化临床访谈作为标准测量方法。所有这三种客观工具的操作特征均显示假阳性诊断率很高,但阴性测试结果通常是有效的。研究发现,对于大多数障碍,每种工具在提高诊断效率方面都具有临床实用性,优于基于基础概率的预测。研究表明,本研究中揭示的许多心理测量学局限性反映了《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第三版修订本轴II的局限性。