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 |

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

Purchase Options

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





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.