筛选智力残疾个体的精神障碍:四种测量方法的比较。

Even Myrbakk, Stephen von Tetzchner
{"title":"筛选智力残疾个体的精神障碍:四种测量方法的比较。","authors":"Even Myrbakk,&nbsp;Stephen von Tetzchner","doi":"10.1352/0895-8017(2008)113[54:SIWIDF]2.0.CO;2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Convergences and divergences between four of the most commonly used checklists for psychiatric disorders (the Reiss Screen, The Mini PAS-ADD, the DASH-II, and the ADD) were examined. We screened 181 individuals with intellectual disability for psychiatric disorders with the four checklists and compared the results on the checklists. The concordance of the overall scores on the four checklists was high; but the agreement on specific psychiatric disorders was limited. The results indicate that the checklists are useful as general indicators of psychiatric disorders, but are of less value for specifying the nature of the disorders in individuals with intellectual disability.</p>","PeriodicalId":76991,"journal":{"name":"American journal of mental retardation : AJMR","volume":"113 1","pages":"54-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1352/0895-8017(2008)113[54:SIWIDF]2.0.CO;2","citationCount":"33","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Screening individuals with intellectual disability for psychiatric disorders: comparison of four measures.\",\"authors\":\"Even Myrbakk,&nbsp;Stephen von Tetzchner\",\"doi\":\"10.1352/0895-8017(2008)113[54:SIWIDF]2.0.CO;2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Convergences and divergences between four of the most commonly used checklists for psychiatric disorders (the Reiss Screen, The Mini PAS-ADD, the DASH-II, and the ADD) were examined. We screened 181 individuals with intellectual disability for psychiatric disorders with the four checklists and compared the results on the checklists. The concordance of the overall scores on the four checklists was high; but the agreement on specific psychiatric disorders was limited. The results indicate that the checklists are useful as general indicators of psychiatric disorders, but are of less value for specifying the nature of the disorders in individuals with intellectual disability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76991,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of mental retardation : AJMR\",\"volume\":\"113 1\",\"pages\":\"54-70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1352/0895-8017(2008)113[54:SIWIDF]2.0.CO;2\",\"citationCount\":\"33\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of mental retardation : AJMR\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1352/0895-8017(2008)113[54:SIWIDF]2.0.CO;2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of mental retardation : AJMR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1352/0895-8017(2008)113[54:SIWIDF]2.0.CO;2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 33

摘要

研究了四种最常用的精神疾病检查表(Reiss Screen, Mini PAS-ADD, DASH-II和ADD)之间的一致性和差异性。我们用这四种检查表筛选了181名智力残疾的精神障碍患者,并比较了检查表上的结果。四种量表总体得分的一致性较高;但在特定精神疾病方面的共识是有限的。结果表明,检查表作为精神疾病的一般指标是有用的,但对于指定智力残疾个体的疾病性质的价值较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Screening individuals with intellectual disability for psychiatric disorders: comparison of four measures.

Convergences and divergences between four of the most commonly used checklists for psychiatric disorders (the Reiss Screen, The Mini PAS-ADD, the DASH-II, and the ADD) were examined. We screened 181 individuals with intellectual disability for psychiatric disorders with the four checklists and compared the results on the checklists. The concordance of the overall scores on the four checklists was high; but the agreement on specific psychiatric disorders was limited. The results indicate that the checklists are useful as general indicators of psychiatric disorders, but are of less value for specifying the nature of the disorders in individuals with intellectual disability.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Augmentative and alternative communication. Evidence for latent classes of IQ in young children with autism spectrum disorder. Gatekeepers of science: attitudes toward the research participation of adults with intellectual disability. Autism profiles of males with fragile X syndrome. Peer interactions and academic engagement of youth with developmental disabilities in inclusive middle and high school classrooms.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1