精神科
精神疾病
药物滥用
CIDI公司
临床心理学
人口
心理健康
心理学
比例(比率)
双重诊断
苦恼
医学
精神障碍患病率
环境卫生
物理
量子力学
作者
Ronald C. Kessler,Peggy R. Barker,Lisa J. Colpe,Joan Epstein,Joseph Gfroerer,Eva Hiripi,Mary J. Howes,Sharon‐Lise T. Normand,Ronald W. Manderscheid,Ellen E. Walters,Alan M. Zaslavsky
出处
期刊:Archives of General Psychiatry
[American Medical Association]
日期:2003-02-01
卷期号:60 (2): 184-184
被引量:4856
标识
DOI:10.1001/archpsyc.60.2.184
摘要
Background
Public Law 102-321 established a block grant for adults with "serious mental illness" (SMI) and required the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to develop a method to estimate the prevalence of SMI. Methods
Three SMI screening scales were developed for possible use in the SAMHSA National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: the Composite International Diagnostic Interview Short-Form (CIDI-SF) scale, the K10/K6 nonspecific distress scales, and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO-DAS). An enriched convenience sample of 155 respondents was administered all screening scales followed by the 12-month Structured Clinical Interview forDSM-IVand the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF). We defined SMI as any 12-monthDSM-IVdisorder, other than a substance use disorder, with a GAF score of less than 60. Results
All screening scales were significantly related to SMI. However, neither the CIDI-SF nor the WHO-DAS improved prediction significantly over the K10 or K6 scales. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of SMI was 0.854 for K10 and 0.865 for K6. The most efficient screening scale, K6, had a sensitivity (SE) of 0.36 (0.08) and a specificity of 0.96 (0.02) in predicting SMI. Conclusions
The brevity and accuracy of the K6 and K10 scales make them attractive screens for SMI. Routine inclusion of either scale in clinical studies would create an important, and heretofore missing, crosswalk between community and clinical epidemiology.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI