Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorChristensen, Tore Buer
dc.contributor.authorPaap, Muirne C. S.
dc.contributor.authorArnesen, Marianne
dc.contributor.authorKoritzinsky, Karoline H.
dc.contributor.authorNysæter, Tor Erik
dc.contributor.authorEikenæs, Ingeborg Helene
dc.contributor.authorGermans Selvik, Sara
dc.contributor.authorWalther, Kristoffer Lygren
dc.contributor.authorTorgersen, Svenn
dc.contributor.authorBender, Donna S.
dc.contributor.authorSkodol, Andrew E.
dc.contributor.authorKvarstein, Elfrida H
dc.contributor.authorPedersen, Geir Feigum
dc.contributor.authorHummelen, Benjamin
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-06T12:27:12Z
dc.date.available2019-11-06T12:27:12Z
dc.date.created2018-08-29T08:15:25Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Personality Assessment. 2018, 100 (6), 630-641.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn0022-3891
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2626914
dc.description.abstractThe fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–5) presents an alternative model for personality disorders in which severity of personality pathology is evaluated by the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS). The Structured Interview for the DSM–5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders, Module I (SCID–5–AMPD I) is a new tool for LPFS assessment, but its interrater reliability (IRR) has not yet been tested. Here we examined the reliability of the Norwegian translation of the SCID–5–AMPD I, applying two different designs: IRR assessment based on ratings of 17 video-recorded SCID–5–AMPD I interviews by five raters; and test–retest IRR based on interviews of 33 patients administered by two different raters within a short interval. For the video-based investigation, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values ranged from .77 to .94 for subdomains, .89 to .95 for domains, and .96 for total LPFS. For the test–retest investigation, ICC ranged from .24 to .72 for subdomains, .59 to .90 for domains, and .75 for total LPFS. The test–retest study revealed questionable reliability estimates for some subdomains. However, overall the level of personality functioning was measured with a sufficient degree of IRR when assessed by the SCID–5–AMPD I.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherTaylor & Francisnb_NO
dc.titleInterrater reliability of the structured clinical interview for the DSM-5 alternative model of personality disorders module i: Level of personality functioning scalenb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber630-641nb_NO
dc.source.volume100nb_NO
dc.source.journalJournal of Personality Assessmentnb_NO
dc.source.issue6nb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/00223891.2018.1483377
dc.identifier.cristin1605123
dc.description.localcodeThis article will not be available due to copyright restrictions (c) 2018 by Taylor & Francisnb_NO
cristin.unitcode194,65,35,0
cristin.unitnameInstitutt for psykisk helse
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel