Suppr超能文献

采用诊断标准的家族史方法。可靠性与有效性。

The family history method using diagnostic criteria. Reliability and validity.

作者信息

Andreasen N C, Endicott J, Spitzer R L, Winokur G

出版信息

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1977 Oct;34(10):1229-35. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1977.01770220111013.

Abstract

Data concerning familial history of psychiatric disorders are often used to assist in diagnosis, to examine the role of genetic or nongenetic familial factors in etiology, or to develop new methods of classification. Information concerning familial prevalence may be collected by two different methods: the family history method (obtaining information from the patinet or a relative concerning all family members), and the family study method (interviewing directly as many relatives as possible concerning their own present or past symptomatology). This study compares these two methods. In general, the family study method is preferred since information is likely to be more accurate. The family history method leads to significant underreporting, but this can be minimized through the use of diagnostic criteria. This study reports on an instrument that has been developed for collecting information concerning family history and that provides criteria for 12 diagnoses--the Family History-Research Diagnostic Criteria. Using diagnostic criteria leads to greater sensitivity, but underreporting remains a major problem of the family history method.

摘要

有关精神疾病家族史的数据常被用于辅助诊断、研究遗传或非遗传家族因素在病因学中的作用,或开发新的分类方法。有关家族患病率的信息可通过两种不同方法收集:家族史方法(从患者或亲属处获取所有家庭成员的信息)和家族研究方法(直接询问尽可能多的亲属关于他们自己目前或过去的症状)。本研究比较了这两种方法。一般来说,家族研究方法更受青睐,因为信息可能更准确。家族史方法导致报告严重不足,但通过使用诊断标准可将其降至最低。本研究报告了一种已开发出来用于收集家族史信息并为12种诊断提供标准的工具——家族史研究诊断标准。使用诊断标准可提高敏感性,但报告不足仍是家族史方法的一个主要问题。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验