The reliability of three definitions of bizarre delusions

Robert L. Spitzer*, Michael B. First, Kenneth S. Kendler, Dan J. Stein

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

36 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: This study was conducted to determine whether the interjudge reliability of the DSM-III-R concept of bizarre delusions could be improved by alternative definitions of the concept. Method: Twelve raters evaluated 180 delusions of separate psychiatric patients according to the DSM-III-R and two alternative definitions of bizarre delusions. Results: The kappas for the DSM-III-R definition and for one of the alternative definitions were 0.64 and 0.65, respectively; for the other alternative definition it was 0.45. All three definitions were highly intercorrelated, largely identifying the same cases. Conclusions: Neither of the alternative definitions of bizarre delusions was more reliable than the DSM-III-R definition. The reliability of the DSM-III-R definition, although only fair, is comparable to that of other important clinical concepts that play a major role in the DSM-III-R diagnostic criteria for psychotic disorders.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)880-884
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Psychiatry
Volume150
Issue number6
StatePublished - 1993

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The reliability of three definitions of bizarre delusions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this