Show simple item record

dc.creatorDassori, Albana
dc.creatorMedina, Rolando
dc.creatorOntiveros Sánchez de la Barquera, Jose Alfonso
dc.creatorNicolini Sánchez, José Humberto
dc.creatorMuñoz, Rodrigo
dc.creatorEscamilla, Michael
dc.creatorContreras Rojas, Javier
dc.creatorRaventós Vorst, Henriette
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-04T19:54:43Z
dc.date.available2014-03-04T19:54:43Z
dc.date.issued2009-07
dc.identifier.citationhttp://journals.lww.com/jonmd/Abstract/2009/07000/Diagnosis_of_Schizophrenia_in_Latino_Populations_.9.aspx
dc.identifier.issn0022-3018
dc.identifier.otheressn: 1539-736X
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10669/9232
dc.descriptionartículo (arbitrado)--Universidad de Costa Rica, Centro de Investigación en Biología Celular y Molecular. 2009. Este documento es privado debido a limitaciones de derechos de autor.es
dc.description.abstractWe determined the rates of agreement between diagnoses, using the Diagnostic Interview for Genetic Studies (DIGS) and diagnoses arrived at, using additional sources of information, to establish whether there are differences in agreement between direct interview diagnoses at US and non-US sites in comparison best estimate consensus process and to identify diagnoses that could increase diagnostic error when only the DIGS is used. DIGS diagnoses were compared with consensus diagnoses that used the same DIGS interview, plus Family Interview for Genetic Studies (FIGS) and review of medical records in 342 psychotic subjects. We found similar numbers of subjects diagnosed with schizophrenia (225 by direct interview, and 232 by consensus process). The majority of those “misdiagnosed” by direct interview had mood disorder by the consensus. Over 10% of the total subjects diagnosed by direct interview as not meeting criteria for schizophrenia had schizophrenia by consensus. There were no statistically significant differences between countries (US vs. non-US sites) in the agreement rate between direct interview diagnosis and consensus diagnosis. In conclusion, a final best-estimate process is essential to make diagnostic distinctions and to reduce diagnostic misclassifications for both research studies and in clinical practicees
dc.description.sponsorshipUniversidad de Costa Ricaes
dc.language.isoen_USes
dc.publisherJournal of Nervous and Mental Disease 2009;197: 530–535es
dc.subjectSchizophreniaes
dc.subjectDiagnostic processes
dc.subjectSalud públicaes
dc.titleDiagnosis of Schizophrenia in Latino Populations. A Comparison of Direct Interview and Consensus Based Multi-Source Methodses
dc.typeartículo científico
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/NMD.0b013e3181aac935
dc.description.procedenceUCR::Vicerrectoría de Investigación::Unidades de Investigación::Ciencias Básicas::Centro de Investigación en Biología Celular y Molecular (CIBCM)es


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record