Patient-informant concordance on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R personality disorders (SCID-II).

Abstract

In the assessment of personality disorders, patients reports can be questioned for several reasons, such as lack of insight, shame, and acute psychiatric state. High concordance between patient-based and informant-based diagnoses would be an indication of the validity of patient reports (convergent validity). The present study examined the concordance between 42 psychotherapy outpatients and their informants (intimates) on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R Personality Disorders (SCID-II). Similar to prior studies, low or only modest levels of agreement were found. In comparison with evaluations of the personality of the patient by the therapist, patient interviews seemed to be more valid than informant interviews. Furthermore, couples with high intensity and intimacy in the contact generally showed higher agreement than couples with low intensity and intimacy. In conclusion, the data slightly suggest that patient reports are more valid than informant reports. However, the lack of a golden standard forces us to find more evidence before concluding that patient reports on personality result in valid diagnoses.