Article |

The Reliability and Validity of Two Structured Diagnostic Interviews for Personality Disorders

Paul A. Pilkonis, PhD; Carol L. Heape, RN, MSN; Joseph M. Proietti, MS; Suzan W. Clark, MEd; Joshua D. McDavid, MD; Timothy E. Pitts, MEd
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1995;52(12):1025-1033. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1995.03950240043009.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background:  The reliability and validity of Axis II diagnoses were investigated in a sample of 108 patients with nonpsychotic Axis I disorders.

Methods:  Patients were assessed for personality disorders (PDs) with either the Personality Disorder Examination (PDE) or the Structured Interview for DSM-III-R Personality (SIDP-R). Validity was examined by comparing interview diagnoses with "bestestimate" consensus diagnoses assigned by a panel of judges.

Results:  Interrater reliabilities were excellent when using continuous data (eg, total or cluster scores; intraclass correlation coefficients, .82 to .92); they were lower with categorical diagnoses (eg, any PD vs no PD; K=0.55 and 0.58 with the two interviews). Validity coefficients (ie, k values reflecting agreement between the interviews and the consensus diagnosis) for the decision of any PD vs no PD were 0.18 (56% agreement) with the PDE and 0.37 (75% agreement) with the SIDP-R; validity coefficients for identifying cases of "marked" PD were 0.21 (62% agreement) with the PDE and 0.24 (60% agreement) with the SIDP-R.

Conclusions:  There have been important advances in the development of structured interviews for Axis II diagnoses, but the findings suggest a continued need to be thoughtful about their strengths and weaknesses before accepting their results as definitive diagnostic tests. The findings also demonstrated some of the advantages of continuous vs categorical data.


Sign In to Access Full Content

Don't have Access?

Register and get free email Table of Contents alerts, saved searches, PowerPoint downloads, CME quizzes, and more

Subscribe for full-text access to content from 1998 forward and a host of useful features

Activate your current subscription (AMA members and current subscribers)

Purchase Online Access to this article for 24 hours





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.
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.
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).
Submit a Comment


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

Sign In to Access Full Content

Related Content

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