Semi‐structured interview for personality functioning DSM‐5 (STiP‐5.1): Psychometric evaluation of the Czech version

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Radek Heissler ◽  
Nikola Doubková ◽  
Joost Hutsebaut ◽  
Marek Preiss
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Evaluation ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5

Psychometrische Evaluation der deutschen Version des Semistrukturierten Interviews zur Erfassung der DSM-5 Persönlichkeitsfunktionen (STiP-5.1)

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (12) ◽  
pp. 499-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Zettl ◽  
Svenja Taubner ◽  
Joost Hutsebaut ◽  
Jana Volkert
Keyword(s):  
Structured Interview ◽  
Sich Eine ◽  
Klinische Praxis ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5

Zusammenfassung Theoretischer Hintergrund Das alternative Modell für Persönlichkeitsstörungen des DSM-5 führt erstmals ein evidenzbasiertes, dimensionales Konzept für die Diagnostik von Störungen der Persönlichkeit ein. Kriterium A, operationalisiert mit der Level of Personality Functioning Scale, differenziert das Ausmaß von Beeinträchtigungen im Funktionsniveau der Persönlichkeit. Mit dem Semi-Structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1) liegt bereits ein valides, reliables und ökonomisches Interview zur Erfassung von Kriterium A vor. Bisher existiert jedoch keine validierte Form des Interviews in deutscher Sprache. Ziel der vorliegenden Studie ist die psychometrische Evaluation der deutschsprachigen Version des STiP-5.1. Methodik Die Validität und Reliabilität des STiP-5.1 wurde in einer Stichprobe von gesunden Erwachsenen (n=55) und stationär behandelten Patienten mit der Diagnose einer psychischen Störung (n=55) untersucht. Die Konstruktvalidität wurde über Korrelationen mit Fragebögen zu strukturellen Beeinträchtigungen (IPO-16, OPD-SFK) und maladaptiven Persönlichkeitseigenschaften (SKID-II-PF) überprüft. Die Interrater-Reliabilität wurde in einer Teilstichprobe von Gesunden und Patienten (n=50) untersucht. Ergebnisse Bezüglich der Validität wurden hohe Korrelationen (r=0,68–0,78) zwischen STiP-5.1-Ratings und konvergenten Selbstberichtfragebögen festgestellt. In der Teilstichprobe zeigte sich eine sehr gute Interrater-Reliabilität (ICC=0,93). Die Dauer der Interviews betrug durchschnittlich 38 Min. Schlussfolgerungen Mit der deutschen Version des STiP-5.1 liegt ein valides, reliables und ökonomisches Interviewverfahren zur dimensionalen Erfassung von Beeinträchtigungen im Funktionsniveau der Persönlichkeit für Forschung und klinische Praxis vor.

scholarly journals Assessment of ICD-11 Personality Disorder Severity in Forensic Patients Using the Semi-structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM-5 (STiP-5.1): Preliminary Findings

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joost Hutsebaut ◽  
Laura C. Weekers ◽  
Nynke Tuin ◽  
Jessica S. P. Apeldoorn ◽  
Erik Bulten
Keyword(s):  
Structured Interview ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Forensic Patients ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Forensic Psychiatric ◽  
Expert Ratings

In forensic settings, several challenges may affect reliability of assessment of personality pathology, specifically when based upon self-report. This study investigates the Semi-Structured Interview for DSM-5 Personality Functioning (STiP-5.1) to assess level of severity of personality functioning in incarcerated patients. Thirty inpatients of three forensic psychiatric facilities completed the STiP 5.1 and additionally completed self-report questionnaires assessing symptom severity, personality functioning and traits. Staff members completed informant versions of personality functioning questionnaires. Previously assessed community (N = 18) and clinical samples (N = 80) were used as a reference. Interrater reliability and internal consistency of the STiP 5.1 were good. As expected, no associations were found between self-report and expert-ratings (STiP 5.1) of personality functioning. Remarkably, no associations were found between informant rated personality functioning and the STiP 5.1. This study confirms the discrepancies between self-report and expert-ratings in forensic settings and identifies the need to design and test assessment instruments within this context instead of generalizing findings obtained in regular mental health care samples. The STiP-5.1 may be a candidate for use in forensic samples, particularly to guide treatment planning and individual patient policy, although it remains unclear what specific information it offers above and beyond self-report and informant-report.

Using the Structured Interview of Personality Organization for DSM–5 Level of Personality Functioning Rating Performed by Inexperienced Raters

2018 ◽  
Vol 100 (6) ◽  
pp. 621-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Preti ◽  
Rossella Di Pierro ◽  
Giulio Costantini ◽  
Ilaria M. A. Benzi ◽  
Chiara De Panfilis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Structured Interview ◽  
Personality Organization ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5

The Detailed Assessment of Posttraumatic Stress–Second Edition (DAPS-2): Initial Psychometric Evaluation in an MTurk-Recruited, Trauma-Exposed Community Sample

Assessment ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 1116-1127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica M. Petri ◽  
Frank W. Weathers ◽  
Tracy K. Witte ◽  
Madison W. Silverstein
Keyword(s):  
Posttraumatic Stress ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Psychometric Evaluation ◽  
Confirmatory Factor Analyses ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Detailed Assessment

The Detailed Assessment of Posttraumatic Stress (DAPS; Briere, 2001) is a comprehensive questionnaire that assesses posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnostic criteria as well as peritraumatic responses and associated problems such as dissociation, suicidality, and substance abuse. DAPS scores have demonstrated excellent reliability, validity, and clinical utility, performing as well or better than leading PTSD questionnaires. The present study was an initial psychometric evaluation of the unreleased DAPS (DAPS-2), revised for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–Fifth edition ( DSM-5), in an MTurk-recruited mixed trauma sample ( N = 367). DAPS-2 PTSD scale and associated features scales demonstrated high internal consistency and strong convergent and discriminant validity. In confirmatory factor analyses, the DSM-5 four-factor model of PTSD provided adequate fit, but the leading seven-factor model provided superior fit. These results indicate the DAPS-2 is a psychometrically sound measure of DSM-5 PTSD symptoms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document