
pmid: 16857345
Although several studies have examined the reliability of diagnosing delusions there is no comprehensive review of the literature. Therefore, the reliability of diagnosing 'delusions in general' and the subcategory of 'bizarre delusions' was reviewed, including both structured interview and standardized instrument methods. The literature suggests that delusions in general can be diagnosed reliably with both structured interview and standardized instruments. However, bizarre delusions are not reliably diagnosed by either, suggesting that this concept may have little clinical validity. Nevertheless, many of the studies reviewed are poorly designed or subject to significant confounds. Criteria are suggested for adequate future studies.
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, PubMed, Psychometrics, Interview, Psychological, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Delusions
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, PubMed, Psychometrics, Interview, Psychological, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Delusions
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 41 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
