Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
Related content
(Reference retrieved automatically from SciELO through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Validity and limitations of the Brazilian version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 2.1)

Full text
Author(s):
Maria Inês Quintana [1] ; Fábio Leite Gastal [2] ; Miguel Roberto Jorge [3] ; Cláudio Torres Miranda [4] ; Sérgio Baxter Andreoli
Total Authors: 5
Affiliation:
[1] Universidade Federal de São Paulo - Brasil
[2] National Hospital Accreditation Organization of Brazil - Brasil
[3] Universidade Federal de São Paulo - Brasil
[4] Pan American Health Organization. Division of Mental Health - Estados Unidos
Total Affiliations: 5
Document type: Journal article
Source: Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria; v. 29, n. 1, p. 18-22, 2006-11-27.
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the concurrent validity of the Brazilian Composite International Diagnostic Interview 2.1 using as gold standard the clinical diagnoses based on the ICD-10 criteria and the Longitudinal, Expert, All Data (LEAD) procedure. METHOD: The sample was composed of 185 subjects selected at psychiatric hospitals, psychiatric outpatient units, the community, and primary care services. These individuals were intentionally selected according to 9 diagnostic groups. Instruments: Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI-core) version 2.1 (paper-and-pencil) administered by 16 trained interviewers. Analysis: concurrent validity of diagnoses of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 12-month. RESULTS: Values found for sensitivity and specificity in each diagnosis were: alcohol-related disorders (79.5%/97.2%); psychoactive substance-related disorders (77.3%/100%); schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders (28.6%/93.9%); manic episode and bipolar affective disorder (38.9%/96.4%); depressive disorder (82.5%/ 93.8%); phobic-anxiety disorder (80.6%/93.5%); obsessive-compulsive disorder (18.2%/98.9%); somatoform disorder (41.7%/90.8%); eating disorder (45.5%/100.0%). CONCLUSION: The Composite International Diagnostic Interview proved to be valid for diagnoses of alcohol-related disorders, psychoactive substance-related disorders, depressive disorder and phobic-anxiety disorder. The probable explanations for the poor performance for the other diagnoses were: necessity of some clinical judgement by the lay interviewer; difficulty to use the Probe Flow Chart; interviewees' difficulty of understanding; and lack of mechanisms to certify the veracity of the information. (AU)