title: [Diagnosing mental disorders: gold or tin standard?--Critical comments on standardized diagnostic interviews and clinical routine diagnoses].
abstract: In a convenience sample of psychosomatic inpatients, Becker et al. reported poor diagnostic congruence between clinical diagnoses from routine examinations and DSM-IV diagnoses derived from the use of a computer-assisted standardized diagnostic interview (CIDI). The authors conclude that there is insufficient validity of such interviews in psychosomatic settings. This paper emphasizes that the results of Becker et al. do not justify this conclusion. Aside from substantial methodological deficits, we question the authors' assumption that clinical diagnoses could be regarded as an appropriate "gold standard".
authors: Institut für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden. knappe@psychologie.tu-dresden.de
authors: Susanne
authors: S
authors: Knappe
authors: Juliane
authors: J
authors: Runge
authors: Katja
authors: K
authors: Beesdo
authors: Frank
authors: F
authors: Jacobi
authors: Hans-Ulrich
authors: HU
authors: Wittchen
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D007406:Interview, Psychological; D001523:Mental Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000523:psychology; D011569:Psychiatric Status Rating Scales; D011570:Psychiatry / Q000592:standards*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results