The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The International Personality Disorder Examination: The World Health Organization/Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration International Pilot Study of Personality Disorders
Abstract
BACKGROUND: One of the aims of the World Health Organization/Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration joint program on psychiatric diagnosis and classification is the development and standardization of diagnostic assessment instruments for use in clinical research worldwide. The International Personality Disorder Examination (IPDE) is a semistructured clinical interview compatible with the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, and the DMS-III-R classification systems. This is the first report of the results of a field trial to investigate the feasibility of using the IPDE to assess personality disorders worldwide. METHODS: The IPDE was administered by 58 psychiatrists and clinical psychologists to 716 patients enrolled in clinical facilities at 14 participating centers in 11 countries in North America, Europe, Africa, and Asia. To determine interrater reliability, 141 of the IPDEs (20%) were independently rated by a silent observer. To determine temporal stability, 243 patients (34%) were reexamined after an average interval of 6 months. RESULTS: The IPDE proved acceptable to clinicians and demonstrated an interrater reliability and temporal stability roughly similar to instruments used to diagnose the psychoses, mood, anxiety, and substance use disorders. CONCLUSION: It is possible to assess personality disorders with reasonably good reliability in different nations, languages, and cultures using a semistructured clinical interview that experienced clinicians find relevant, meaningful, and user-friendly.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The IPDE has adequate inter-rater reliability (.71 -.91) with stability over time comparable to other widely used measures (.55 -.84) (Loranger et al., 1994).”
From Childhood Physical Abuse and Antisocial Traits: Mediating Role of Posttraumatic Stress Symptom Clusters (2022) · cites this paper as Loranger et al., 1994
Citations
Cites
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471445428 · Cited by 18,646
Robins, L. N. (1981) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1981.01780290015001 · Cited by 5,219
A Systematic Method for Clinical Description and Classification of Personality Variants: A Proposal
Cloninger, C. R. (1987) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1987.01800180093014 · Cited by 3,678
Robins, L. N. (1988) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1988.01800360017003 · Cited by 2,909
SCAN: Schedules fonr Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry
Wing, J. K. (1990) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1990.01810180089012 · Cited by 2,517
Book Review: Measurement and Classification of Psychiatric Symptoms
Priest, R. G. (1975) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine · doi:10.1177/003591577506800751 · Cited by 2,268
The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID)
Williams, J. B. W. (1992) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1992.01820080038006 · Cited by 1,641
Estimation of the reliability of ratings.
Ebel, R. L. (1951) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02288803 · Cited by 976
Reliability Studies of Psychiatric Diagnosis
Grove, W. M. (1981) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1981.01780290042004 · Cited by 450
A Structured Interview for the DSM-III Personality Disorders
Stangl, D. K. (1985) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1985.01790290073008 · Cited by 443
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,002 of 1,002
Standardisierte Befunddiagnostik in der Psychiatrie
Möller, H. (2015) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-45028-0_24-1
Neuropsychologische Testdiagnostik
Hennig‐Fast, K., & Brunnauer, A. (2017) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-49295-6_25
Metadata
- Authors
- Loranger, A. W.
- Affiliations
- Cornell University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Loranger, Armand W.
- Venue
- Archives of General Psychiatry
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1994-03-01
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 215
- ISSN
- 0003-990X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2126639672
- Cited by
- 1,069
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 68 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 64 · 2012: 58
- FWCI
- 21.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Archives of General Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
- Keywords
- International Personality Disorder Examination, personality disorders, inter-rater reliability, temporal stability, diagnostic assessment, ICD-10, DSM-III-R, cross-cultural assessment, field trials
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Mental Disorders, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Diagnosis, Differential, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Terminology as Topic, Personality Disorders, Pilot Projects, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, United States, United States Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, World Health Organization, Reproducibility of Results
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review