Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-shngb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-13T22:41:34.436Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reliability and procedural validity of UM-CIDI DSM-III-R phobic disorders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2009

H.-U. Wittchen*
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Psychiatrie Klinisches Institut, Munich, Germany; Institute for Social Research, Department of Sociology and Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
S. Zhao
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Psychiatrie Klinisches Institut, Munich, Germany; Institute for Social Research, Department of Sociology and Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
J. M. Abelson
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Psychiatrie Klinisches Institut, Munich, Germany; Institute for Social Research, Department of Sociology and Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
J. L. Abelson
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Psychiatrie Klinisches Institut, Munich, Germany; Institute for Social Research, Department of Sociology and Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
R. C. Kessler
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Psychiatrie Klinisches Institut, Munich, Germany; Institute for Social Research, Department of Sociology and Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
*
1Address for correspondence: Professor Hans-Ulrich Wittchen, Max-Planck-Institut für Psychiatrie, Klinisches Institut, Kraeplinstrasse 10, D 80804 München, Germany.

Synopsis

We evaluate the long-term test–retest reliability and procedural validity of phobia diagnoses in the UM-CIDI, the version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, used in the US National Co-morbidity Survey (NCS) and a number of other ongoing large-scale epidemiological surveys. Test–retest reliabilities of lifetime diagnoses of simple phobia, social phobia, and agoraphobia over a period between 16 and 34 months were K = 0·46, 0·47, and 0·63, respectively. Concordances with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID) were K = 0·45, 0·62, and 0·63, respectively. Diagnostic discrepancies with the SCID were due to the UM-CIDI under-diagnosing. Post hoc analysis demonstrated that modification of UM-CIDI coding rules could dramatically improve cross-sectional procedural validity for both simple phobia (K = 0·57) and social phobia (K = 0·95). Based on these results, it seems likely that future modification of CIDI questions and coding rules could lead to substantial improvements in diagnostic validity.

Information

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable