Quantification of agreement in psychiatric diagnosis. A new approach.
Quantification of agreement in psychiatric diagnosis. A new approach.
复制标题
精神病学诊断一致性的量化。
DOI：
10.1001/archpsyc.1967.01730250085012
复制
发表时间：
1967
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Endicott
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Spitzer;J. Cohen;J. Fleiss;J. Endicott
最近几年，有许多研究都是关于精神病诊断的可靠性问题。难以吸收各种调查结果的原因是缺乏统一的方法来量化数据的显著特征。因此，一项研究报告的总体完全一致率为54%，1而另一项研究报告的总体列联系数为0.714。[2]还有一个人会报告说，如果一个诊断医生做出了一个特定的诊断，另一个诊断医生做出同样诊断的概率是0.57。3此外，如通常使用的，所有这些方法都存在一个或多个缺陷，这些缺陷使用表1的假设数据来说明。(1)不考虑机会一致性，或者等效地，不使用进行各种诊断的基本比率来限定一致性度量。
THE LAST few years have seen a number of studies dealing with the problem of the reliability of psychiatric diagnoses. What makes it difficult to assimilate the various findings is the lack of uniform methods for quantifying the salient features of the data. Thus, one study will report an overall rate of perfect agreement of 54%, 1 while another will report an overall contingency coefficient of 0.714. 2 Still another will report that, given that one diagnostician has made a particular diagnosis, the probability that another diagnostician will make the same diagnosis is 0.57. 3 Furthermore, as generally used, all of these methods suffer from one or more deficiencies which are illustrated using the hypothetical data of Table 1. (1) Chance agreement is not taken into account, or equivalently, the base rates at which the various diagnoses are made are not used to qualify the agreement measure.