Key result
The SCI-PAS demonstrated good internal consistency (>0.70 for 6 of 9 domains), excellent inter-rater reliability, and discriminant validity for panic disorder versus control subjects.
Why the study?
Does the Structured Clinical Interview for Panic-Agoraphobic Spectrum (SCI-PAS) demonstrate adequate psychometric properties and discriminant validity across different patient populations?
Cross-Sectional (n=422)
Yes
Does the Structured Clinical Interview for Panic-Agoraphobic Spectrum (SCI-PAS) demonstrate adequate psychometric properties and discriminant validity across different patient populations?
The SCI-PAS is a feasible and valid clinical interview with good internal consistency and discriminant validity for assessing panic-agoraphobic spectrum symptoms.
Supports SCI-PAS as a research tool for panic spectrum symptoms; leaves open routine clinical adoption without further validation.
This paper reports on the feasibility, acceptability and psychometric properties of the Structured Clinical Interview for Panic‐Agoraphobic Spectrum (SCI‐PAS). This interview was designed to assess the lifetime presence of symptoms and other clinical features considered to comprise the panic‐agoraphobic spectrum. The interview has 114 items grouped into nine domains. A total of 422 subjects, from 11 centres located throughout Italy, participated in this study. Data were collected from three groups of subjects: psychiatric patients meeting DSM‐IV criteria for panic disorder (n = 141), cardiovascular patients (n = 140), including 29 with post‐myocardial infarction, and university students (n = 141). The inter‐rater reliability and the internal consistency of the SCI‐PAS measures were assessed using the intra‐class correlation coefficient and the Kuder‐Richardson coefficient, respectively. Discriminant validity was assessed by comparing results in patients with panic disorder to those in the other groups. The interview required an average of 25 (±5) minutes to administer. Patients and clinicians found the scale to be highly useful, providing information not previously obtained. Internal consistency was good (>0.70) for six out of nine SCI‐PAS domains. The inter‐rater reliability was excellent (>0.70) for all the domains except for ‘other phobias’ (0.467). Patients with panic disorder scored significantly higher on each domain, and on the overall panic spectrum, than did the control subjects. In conclusion, the SCI‐PAS is a useful clinical interview, which can be administered in a reasonable period of time. This assessment further demonstrates good internal consistency, discriminant validity, and inter‐rater reliability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cassano et al. (1999) conducted a cross-sectional in Panic disorder (n=422). Structured Clinical Interview for Panic-Agoraphobic Spectrum (SCI-PAS) vs. Control subjects (cardiovascular patients and university students) was evaluated on Internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, and discriminant validity. The SCI-PAS demonstrated good internal consistency (>0.70 for 6 of 9 domains), excellent inter-rater reliability, and discriminant validity for panic disorder versus control subjects.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: