CNS spectrums · 2013
Test-retest reliability and sensitivity to change of the dimensional anxiety scales for DSM-5.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Knappe Susanne, Klotsche Jens, Heyde Franziska, Hiob Sarah, Siegert Jens, Hoyer Jürgen, Strobel Anja, LeBeau Richard T, Craske Michelle G, Wittchen Hans-Ulrich, Beesdo-Baum Katja
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This article reports on the test-retest reliability and sensitivity to change of a set of brief dimensional self-rating questionnaires for social anxiety disorder (SAD-D), specific phobia (SP-D), agoraphobia (AG-D), panic disorder (PD-D), and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD-D), as well as a general cross-cutting anxiety scale (Cross-D), which were developed to supplement categorical diagnoses in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM-5).
METHODS: The German versions of the dimensional anxiety scales were administered to 218 students followed up approximately 2 weeks later (Study 1) and 55 outpatients (23 with anxiety diagnoses) followed-up 1 year later (Study 2). Probable diagnostic status in students was determined by the DIA-X/M-CIDI stem screening-questionnaire (SSQ). In the clinical sample, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) diagnoses were assessed at Time 1 using the DIA-X/M-CIDI. At Time 2, the patient-version of the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (CGI-I) was applied to assess change.
RESULTS: Good psychometric properties, including high test-retest reliability, were found for the dimensional scales except for SP-D. In outpatients, improvement at Time 2 was associated with significant decrease in PD-D, GAD-D, and Cross-D scores. Discussion Major advantages of the scales include that they are brief, concise, and based on a consistent template to measure the cognitive, physiological, and behavioral symptoms of fear and anxiety. Further replication in larger samples is needed. Given its modest psychometric properties, SP-D needs refinement.
CONCLUSION: Increasing evidence from diverse samples suggests clinical utility of the dimensional anxiety scales.
METHODS: The German versions of the dimensional anxiety scales were administered to 218 students followed up approximately 2 weeks later (Study 1) and 55 outpatients (23 with anxiety diagnoses) followed-up 1 year later (Study 2). Probable diagnostic status in students was determined by the DIA-X/M-CIDI stem screening-questionnaire (SSQ). In the clinical sample, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) diagnoses were assessed at Time 1 using the DIA-X/M-CIDI. At Time 2, the patient-version of the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (CGI-I) was applied to assess change.
RESULTS: Good psychometric properties, including high test-retest reliability, were found for the dimensional scales except for SP-D. In outpatients, improvement at Time 2 was associated with significant decrease in PD-D, GAD-D, and Cross-D scores. Discussion Major advantages of the scales include that they are brief, concise, and based on a consistent template to measure the cognitive, physiological, and behavioral symptoms of fear and anxiety. Further replication in larger samples is needed. Given its modest psychometric properties, SP-D needs refinement.
CONCLUSION: Increasing evidence from diverse samples suggests clinical utility of the dimensional anxiety scales.