首页> 外文期刊>European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience >Accuracy of diagnostic classification and clinical utility assessment of ICD-11 compared to ICD-10 in 10 mental disorders: findings from a web-based field study
【24h】

Accuracy of diagnostic classification and clinical utility assessment of ICD-11 compared to ICD-10 in 10 mental disorders: findings from a web-based field study

机译:诊断分类准确性和ICD-11临床公用事业评估与ICD-10在10个精神障碍中:从基于网络的实地研究的结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In this web-based field study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of 10 selected mental disorders between the ICD-11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) and the ICD-10 CDDG using vignettes in a sample of 928 health professionals from all WHO regions. On average, the ICD-11 CDDG displayed significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (71.9% for ICD-11, 53.2% for ICD-10), higher ease of use, better goodness of fit, higher clarity, and lower time required for diagnosis compared to the ICD-10 CDDG. The advantages of the ICD-11 CDDG were largely limited to new diagnoses in ICD-11. After limiting analyses to diagnoses existing in ICD-11 and ICD-10, the ICD-11 CDDG were only superior in ease of use. The ICD-11 CDDG were not inferior in diagnostic accuracy or clinical utility compared to the ICD-10 CDDG for any of the vignettes. Diagnostic accuracy was consistent across WHO regions and independent of participants' clinical experience. There were no differences between medical doctors and psychologists in diagnostic accuracy, but members of other health professions had greater difficulties in determining correct diagnoses based on the ICD-11 CDDG. In sum, there were no differences in diagnostic accuracy for diagnoses existing in ICD-10 and ICD-11, but the introduction of new diagnoses in ICD-11 has improved the diagnostic classification of some clinical presentations. The favourable clinical utility ratings of the ICD-11 CDDG give reason to expect a positive evaluation by health professionals in the implementation phase of ICD-11. Yet, training in ICD-11 is needed to further enhance the diagnostic accuracy.
机译:在基于Web的实地研究中,我们将10种所选精神障碍的诊断准确性和临床效用与ICD-11临床描述和诊断指南(CDDG)和ICD-10 CDDG之间的诊断准确性和临床效用与来自928名卫生专业人员的样本中的VIGNETTES所有的世卫组织地区。平均而言,ICD-11 CDDG显着提高诊断准确性(ICD-11的71.9%,ICD-10的53.2%),易用性更高,适合良好,较高的透明度和较低时间诊断ICD-10 CDDG。 ICD-11 CDDG的优点主要限于ICD-11中的新诊断。在限制分析后诊断为ICD-11和ICD-10,ICD-11 CDDG易于使用。与任何Vignettes的ICD-10 CDDG相比,ICD-11 CDDG与诊断准确性或临床效用不等。诊断准确性在世界卫生组织地区一致,独立于参与者的临床经验。医学医生与心理学家在诊断准确性之间没有差异,但在基于ICD-11 CDDG确定正确的诊断时,其他卫生职业的成员在确定正确的诊断方面具有更大的困难。总而言之,ICD-10和ICD-11中存在的诊断诊断的诊断准确性没有差异,但在ICD-11中引入新诊断改善了一些临床演示的诊断分类。 ICD-11 CDDG的有利临床公用事业额定值导致卫生专业人员在ICD-11实施阶段进行积极评估。然而,需要在ICD-11中进行培训,以进一步提高诊断准确性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号