TY - JOUR
T1 - Prevalence of dissociative disorders in psychiatric in-patients
T2 - The impact of study characteristics
AU - Friedl, Monica
AU - Draijer, Nel
AU - De Jonge, Peter
PY - 2000
Y1 - 2000
N2 - Objective: Prevalence rates for dissociative disorders among psychiatric in-patients vary widely. The aim of this meta-analysis is to offer an explanation for these differences. Method: Prevalence studies using a clinical diagnostic interview among psychiatric in-patients were included. Hypotheses concerning the impact of blind versus not blind designs, choice of diagnostic instrument and continental background were tested. Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. In blind studies the prevalence rate for dissociative disorders was significantly lower (but not for DID). Studies using the SCID-D (compared to the DDIS) and European studies had significantly lower prevalence rates for both dissociative disorders as well as for DID. Conclusion: The choice of diagnostic instrument and cultural differences in interpretation of symptoms are major explanations for differences in prevalence of dissociative disorders and DID. Comparative, blind research using both DDIS and SCID-D in the assessment of dissociative disorders is advised.
AB - Objective: Prevalence rates for dissociative disorders among psychiatric in-patients vary widely. The aim of this meta-analysis is to offer an explanation for these differences. Method: Prevalence studies using a clinical diagnostic interview among psychiatric in-patients were included. Hypotheses concerning the impact of blind versus not blind designs, choice of diagnostic instrument and continental background were tested. Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. In blind studies the prevalence rate for dissociative disorders was significantly lower (but not for DID). Studies using the SCID-D (compared to the DDIS) and European studies had significantly lower prevalence rates for both dissociative disorders as well as for DID. Conclusion: The choice of diagnostic instrument and cultural differences in interpretation of symptoms are major explanations for differences in prevalence of dissociative disorders and DID. Comparative, blind research using both DDIS and SCID-D in the assessment of dissociative disorders is advised.
KW - Dissociative disorders
KW - Meta-analysis
KW - Prevalence
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033647088&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1034/j.1600-0447.2000.102006423.x
DO - 10.1034/j.1600-0447.2000.102006423.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 11142430
AN - SCOPUS:0033647088
SN - 0001-690X
VL - 102
SP - 423
EP - 428
JO - Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
JF - Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
IS - 6
ER -