This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Wolfgang Maier, MD; Michael Philipp, MD; Raimund Buller, MD
Department of Psychiatry University of Mainz Untere Zahlbacher Straβe 8 D-6500 Mainz, Federal Republic of Germany

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1988;45(10):963-964.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

Structured interviews are extensively used in epidemiologic and clinical settings for case identification and classification of psychiatric disorders. They are considered to enhance the reliability and validity of the classification. However, no empirical data are available that demonstrate the superiority of structured clinical interviews relative to nonstandardized clinical interviews performed by clinicians using a checklist of the criteria of operationalized diagnoses. To fill this gap, diagnoses of depressive and anxiety disorders were compared for reliability and procedural validity using a structured clinical interview and a checklist procedure.

Patients and Methods.—

Forty consecutive inpatients with depressive and/or anxiety syndromes (diagnosed as effective psychosis, neuroses, or adjustment reaction in International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision) were interviewed four times during the third and fourth week of hospitalization with equidistant temporal intervals; twice in a structured clinical interview using the SCID-UP (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III, Upjohn Version¹) and . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?