1994
DOI: 10.1521/pedi.1994.8.2.89
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interrater Reliability of ICD-10 Guidelines for the Diagnosis of Personality Disorders

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is because of the much wider use of the DSM equivalents. Only one formal evaluation of the reliability of the ICD‐10 classification of personality disorders has been published (Merson, Tyrer, Duke, & Henderson, ), and only one well‐researched instrument, the International Personality Disorder Examination (Loranger et al, ), has tried to formulate the criteria for both ICD and DSM personality disorder diagnostic groups. One of the past concerns expressed about the frequent revisions of the DSM is the lack of interaction between the ICD and DSM working groups (Kendell, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is because of the much wider use of the DSM equivalents. Only one formal evaluation of the reliability of the ICD‐10 classification of personality disorders has been published (Merson, Tyrer, Duke, & Henderson, ), and only one well‐researched instrument, the International Personality Disorder Examination (Loranger et al, ), has tried to formulate the criteria for both ICD and DSM personality disorder diagnostic groups. One of the past concerns expressed about the frequent revisions of the DSM is the lack of interaction between the ICD and DSM working groups (Kendell, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients were approached and asked to give informed consent for an interview to take place with their principal worker to find out more about their personality status, using the informant-based ICD-10 version of the Personality Assessment Schedule (PAS-I). The Personality Assessment Schedule (PAS; Tyrer et al, 1979) is a semistructured trait-based interview, and the PAS-I version (Merson et al, 1994;Tyrer, 2000) links trait description with the ICD-10 operational criteria for individual personality disorders. It is a two-stage interview: in stage 1 screening questions from the original PAS are asked, and if an answer is positive, the rater moves to stage 2 where questions address the diagnostic guidelines for each personality disorder.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Parasuicide patients presenting at two west London hospitals (St. Mary's Hospital and Chelsea and Westminster Hospital) with an episode of deliberate self-harm were assessed for inclusion in the study. Selection criteria were: aged between 16 and 50 years; personality disturbance within the flamboyant cluster (antisocial, histrionic, and emotionally unstable) assessed using the Personality Assessment Schedule (Merson, Tyrer, Duke & Henderson, 1994); and having at least one other episode of deliberate self-harm within the previous 12 months. Potential participants were excluded if they had an ICD-10 (World Health Organisation, 1992) diagnosis within the organic, alcohol or drug dependence, or schizophrenia groups.…”
Section: Methods Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%