Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

American Psychological Association, Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 1(22), p. 1-19, 2015

DOI: 10.1111/cpsp.12088

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

A Review of the Agreement Between Clinicians’ Personality Disorder Diagnoses and Those From Other Methods and Sources

Journal article published in 2015 by Douglas B. Samuel ORCID
This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

This review synthesizes a wide literature on the agreement of treating clinicians’ PD diagnoses with each other and their convergence with common research methods. Median interrater reliability between clinicians was moderate when calculated dimensionally (r = .46) or categorically (κ = .40). The agreement between clinicians’ diagnoses and those from research methods (e.g., self-report questionnaire) was more modest. Median dimensional agreement across 27 studies ranged from .05 to .36, with an overall median of .23. This overall value was moderated by several factors. First, clinicians’ diagnoses agreed more with semi-structured interviews than self-report questionnaires. Second, convergence increased slightly when clinicians utilized more systematic diagnostic methods. Results suggest relatively little overlap between PD diagnoses assigned in research versus naturalistic settings.