We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Article |

Some Problems of Validity With the Psychiatric Status Schedule as an Instrument for Case Identification and Classification in the General Population

Bruce P. Dohrenwend, PhD; Thomas J. Yager, PhD; Gladys Egri, MD; Frederick S. Mendelsohn, MD
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1980;37(6):720-721. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1980.01780190118015.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


To the Editor.—  Spitzer et al1 have criticized our article2 about the Psychiatric Status Schedule (PSS) on the grounds that we were confused about the appropriate criteria with which to evaluate its adequacy for the purposes of epidemiologic research. More specifically, they argue that our reliance on internal consistency reliability was misplaced since low internal consistency is an underestimate of true reliability and therefore does not necessarily invalidate the PSS scales. Spitzer and his colleagues believe that the PSS can be used validly in the general population for "case finding," a term we will attempt to clarify before addressing their major criticism.

Uses of the PSS.—  The PSS contains nearly 500 items. Scoring these items requires a considerable amount of prior clinical sophistication. It was never our intention to use such a demanding instrument for the purpose of differentiating "cases" from "noncases," regardless of diagnostic types. There are a


Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.