Abstract
Abstract Independent psychiatric illness assessments of family practice patients are compared. Of the three ratings-self-ratings, evaluation by the treating physician, and a clinical interview by a research psychiatrist-patient and research psychiatrist ratings achieved the highest level of agreement (50% of the variance). Of the three kinds of raters, treating physicians showed the greatest variability. Least agreement appeared for Practice Two, upper middle class college town people who were relatively high in interpersonal sensitivity complaints. Most agreement appeared for Practice Three, ghetto inner city people who were relatively high in somatic complaints. The rating performance of treating physicians is attributed to both rating instrument and rating context.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Social Science & Medicine. Part A: Medical Psychology & Medical Sociology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
