Comparatively, when confronted with a differential diagnosis (eg, distinguishing OCD from an anxiety disorder or depression), diagnostic specificity would take precedence. For example, measures with strong diagnostic sensitivity might be prioritized when screening for symptoms. First, one must identify the primary aim of the assessment and prioritize measures in line with this goal. Several factors are important to consider when developing an evidence-based assessment battery. Finally, this paper concludes with recommendations for an evidence-based assessment based on individualized assessment goals and empirical support.
Second, the incorporation of additional important factors in an evidence-based OCD assessment is discussed (ie, impairment, family accommodation, and insight).
Clinician-rated measures are discussed initially, followed by adult self-report measures, and finally parent/child measures. First, the pragmatics of measure administration and psychometric properties are reviewed. In response to these challenges, this paper reviews commonly used OCD measures that have been examined in research studies to enhance clinicians’ abilities to detect and monitor OCD symptom severity during assessment and treatment. Obsessive–compulsive symptoms can be difficult to assess, given that they are often manifested internally, and individuals with OCD may not be inclined to recognize and report symptoms (ie, limited insight). Most interviewees and interviewers reported the administration of the Persian SCID as feasible.Ĭonclusion: Acceptable reliability of diagnoses made by the Persian translation of SCID, and its feasibility suggest it as a useful diagnostic instrument in clinical, research, and educational settings.A comprehensive evidence-based assessment is a critical step in accurately identifying the presence and severity of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) in both clinical and research practice. Overall weighted kappa equaled 0.52 for current diagnoses and 0.55 for lifetime diagnoses. Results: Diagnostic agreement of SCID test and retest were fair to good for most diagnostic categories (kappas over 0.6). Feasibility for interviewees (n=299) and interviewers was tested by questionnaires considering the length of interview, its being boring/tiring, comprehensibility and acceptance of the questions, and difficulty of administration. For test-retest reliability assessment, two SCID interviews (3 to 7 days apart) were administered to 104 subjects and the level of diagnostic agreement was assessd. This is part of a larger study on validation of the SCID on.299 subjects admitted to outpatient and inpatient services of three psychiatric centers ( Roozbeh Hospital, Imam Hossein Hospital and Iran Hospital ) in Tehran, Iran. Method: The study had two phases: a) translation of the instrument and assessing the cross-cultural equivalence, including forward and backward translation, and face validity of the translated version in regard with cross-cultural characteristics b) reliability and feasibility assessment of the Persian translation on an Iranian clinical population.
Objective: In this study the Structured Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV axis I disorders (SCIDI) was translated into Persian using a cross-cultural methodology, and its reliability and feasibility was tested in a multi-center study.
0 kommentar(er)
