{"title":"The Diagnostic Interview for Sexual Dysfunctions in Women for DSM-5 and ICD-11: Development and initial validation using a vignette-based approach","authors":"Rebekka Schwesig, Julia Velten, Jürgen Hoyer","doi":"10.1002/mpr.2004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the newly developed <i>Diagnostic Interview for Sexual Dysfunctions</i> <i>in</i> <i>Women</i> (DISEX-F), which covers diagnostic criteria of DSM-5 and ICD-11.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Thirty-two actresses portrayed 32 cases of female sexual dysfunctions (= standardized patients). To calculate inter-rater reliability, each standardized patient was interviewed independently by two trained diagnosticians using the DISEX-F. Interviews were videotaped, and each videotape was evaluated by two other independent diagnosticians. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated by comparing the assigned diagnoses to the target diagnoses pre-determined in the case vignettes. As a side criterion, the acceptance of the DISEX-F among diagnosticians was assessed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Specificity was found to be generally clinically satisfying (DSM-5: 0.90–0.99; ICD-11: 0.95–0.99), while sensitivity (DSM-5: 0.40–0.92; ICD-11: 0.71–0.96) and inter-rater reliability (DSM-5: Cohen's kappa = 0.44–1; ICD-11: Cohen's kappa = 0.75–0.94) greatly varied between classification systems and disorders. Imprecise acting and false differential diagnostic decisions were identified as major sources of mismatch. The acceptance of the DISEX-F was high.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Results encourage usage of the DISEX-F for ICD-11 diagnoses. Mixed results were found for DSM-5 diagnoses, which can partly be explained by shortcomings in DSM-5 criteria.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50310,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/mpr.2004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mpr.2004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the newly developed Diagnostic Interview for Sexual DysfunctionsinWomen (DISEX-F), which covers diagnostic criteria of DSM-5 and ICD-11.
Methods
Thirty-two actresses portrayed 32 cases of female sexual dysfunctions (= standardized patients). To calculate inter-rater reliability, each standardized patient was interviewed independently by two trained diagnosticians using the DISEX-F. Interviews were videotaped, and each videotape was evaluated by two other independent diagnosticians. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated by comparing the assigned diagnoses to the target diagnoses pre-determined in the case vignettes. As a side criterion, the acceptance of the DISEX-F among diagnosticians was assessed.
Results
Specificity was found to be generally clinically satisfying (DSM-5: 0.90–0.99; ICD-11: 0.95–0.99), while sensitivity (DSM-5: 0.40–0.92; ICD-11: 0.71–0.96) and inter-rater reliability (DSM-5: Cohen's kappa = 0.44–1; ICD-11: Cohen's kappa = 0.75–0.94) greatly varied between classification systems and disorders. Imprecise acting and false differential diagnostic decisions were identified as major sources of mismatch. The acceptance of the DISEX-F was high.
Conclusion
Results encourage usage of the DISEX-F for ICD-11 diagnoses. Mixed results were found for DSM-5 diagnoses, which can partly be explained by shortcomings in DSM-5 criteria.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research (MPR) publishes high-standard original research of a technical, methodological, experimental and clinical nature, contributing to the theory, methodology, practice and evaluation of mental and behavioural disorders. The journal targets in particular detailed methodological and design papers from major national and international multicentre studies. There is a close working relationship with the US National Institute of Mental Health, the World Health Organisation (WHO) Diagnostic Instruments Committees, as well as several other European and international organisations.
MPR aims to publish rapidly articles of highest methodological quality in such areas as epidemiology, biostatistics, generics, psychopharmacology, psychology and the neurosciences. Articles informing about innovative and critical methodological, statistical and clinical issues, including nosology, can be submitted as regular papers and brief reports. Reviews are only occasionally accepted.
MPR seeks to monitor, discuss, influence and improve the standards of mental health and behavioral neuroscience research by providing a platform for rapid publication of outstanding contributions. As a quarterly journal MPR is a major source of information and ideas and is an important medium for students, clinicians and researchers in psychiatry, clinical psychology, epidemiology and the allied disciplines in the mental health field.