Cited by 771Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyReliability and Agreement in MeasurementPersonality Traits and Psychology

The Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study: Reliability of Axis I and II Diagnoses

Open access
Zanarini, Mary C., Skodol, Andrew E., Bender, Donna, Dolan, Regina, Sanislow, Charles, Schaefer, Elizabeth, Morey, Leslie C., Grilo, Carlos M. +3 more·2000·Journal of Personality Disorders

Abstract

Both the interrater and test-retest-retest reliability of axis I and axis II disorders were assessed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I) and the Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (DIPD-IV). Fair-good median interrater kappa (.40-.75) were found for all axis II disorders diagnosed five times or more, except antisocial personality disorder (1.0). All of the test-retest kappa for axis II disorders, except for narcissistic personality disorder (1.0) and paranoid personality disorder (.39), were also found to be fair-good. Interrater and test-retest dimensional reliability figures for axis II were generally higher than those for their categorical counterparts; most were in the excellent range (> .75). In terms of axis I, excellent median interrater kappa were found for six of the 10 disorders diagnosed five times or more, whereas fair-good median interrater kappa were found for the other four axis I disorders. In general, test-retest reliability figures for axis I disorders were somewhat lower than the interrater reliability figures. Three test-retest kappa were in the excellent range, six were in the fair-good range, and one (for dysthymia) was in the poor range (.35). Taken together, the results of this study suggest that both axis I and axis II disorders can be diagnosed reliably when using appropriate semistructured interviews. They also suggest that the reliability of axis II disorders is roughly equivalent to that reliability found for most axis I disorders.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1521/pedi.2000.14.4.291

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Maffei, C, Fossati, A., Agostoni, I., Barraco A., Bagnato, M., Deborah, D., Namia, C, Novella, L., &Petrachi, M. (1997). Inter rater reliability and internal consisten cy of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disor ders (SCID-II), version 2.0. Journal of Personality Disorders, 1 1 , 279-284.
  2. Zimmerman, M. (1994). Diagnosing personal ity disorders: A review of issues and re search methods. Archives of General Psychiatry, 5 J, 225-245.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zanarini, M. C., Skodol, A. E., Bender, D., Dolan, R., Sanislow, C., Schaefer, E., Morey, L. C., Grilo, C. M., Shea, M. T., McGlashan, T. H., & Gunderson, J. G.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Brown University (US)
Venue
Journal of Personality Disorders
Published
2000-12
Volume
14
Issue
4
Pages
291-299
ISSN
0885-579X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2146236789
Cited by
771
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 47 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 63
FWCI
18.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Personality Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Wesleyan University Digital Collections (Wesleyan University) (submittedVersion)
  • Wesleyan University Digital Collections (Wesleyan University) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • WESLEYAN
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R10 MH50850, R10 MH50837, R10 MH 50838, R10MH050850, R10MH050837, R10MH050840, R10MH050838, R10MH050839, R10 MH50839, R10 MH 50840)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
personality disorders, Axis I disorders, Axis II personality disorders, diagnostic reliability, inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, SCID-I, semi-structured interviews, antisocial personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, paranoid personality disorder, dysthymia
MeSH terms
Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Male, Personality Disorders, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation

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