Development of the Clinical Interview for Bipolar Disorder (CIBD) - Rational and experts' panel evaluation
<p>Bipolar Disorder (BD) is underdiagnosed, and the average time gap between the onset and diagnosis due to poor screening is 7 years. This study aims to describe the development of the semi-structured Clinical Interview for Bipolar Disorder (CIBD) for diagnosing bipolar spectrum disorders and...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book |
| Published: |
Journal of Neurology, Neurological Science and Disorders - Peertechz Publications,
2023-08-28.
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Connect to this object online. |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000 am a22000003u 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | peertech__10_17352_jnnsd_000056 | ||
| 042 | |a dc | ||
| 100 | 1 | 0 | |a Julieta Azevedo |e author |
| 700 | 1 | 0 | |a Paula Castilho |e author |
| 700 | 1 | 0 | |a Diogo Carreiras |e author |
| 700 | 1 | 0 | |a Maria João Martins |e author |
| 700 | 1 | 0 | |a Célia Barreto Carvalho |e author |
| 700 | 1 | 0 | |a Sónia Cherpe |e author |
| 700 | 1 | 0 | |a Ana Telma Pereira |e author |
| 700 | 1 | 0 | |a António Macedo |e author |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | |a Development of the Clinical Interview for Bipolar Disorder (CIBD) - Rational and experts' panel evaluation |
| 260 | |b Journal of Neurology, Neurological Science and Disorders - Peertechz Publications, |c 2023-08-28. | ||
| 520 | |a <p>Bipolar Disorder (BD) is underdiagnosed, and the average time gap between the onset and diagnosis due to poor screening is 7 years. This study aims to describe the development of the semi-structured Clinical Interview for Bipolar Disorder (CIBD) for diagnosing bipolar spectrum disorders and assessing the impact of psychological interventions, using a mixed method approach of clinician and interviewee ratings, with a recovery approach. </p><p>Methods: CIBD was based on DSM-5 and developed by a multidisciplinary team. Firstly, a research review on BD assessment was conducted, and published guidelines from international BD experts were incorporated into the interview. Secondly, an expert panel formed by 9 psychiatrists, 8 psychologists, a nurse, and a neuropsychologist with expertise in BD was asked to assess it for clarity, pertinence, and completeness.</p><p>Results: CIBD structure and sections were rated with high scores (range: 0-80) regarding usefulness (78.63), clarity (74.53), and completeness (77.63). The expert panel gave suggestions to clarify, add and change some instructions in the introduction, suicide risk scale for BD, and the empowerment scale, and an index was also added to help navigate the interview.</p><p>Conclusion: CIBD is an acceptable and comprehensive tool for assessing BD and related disorders contributing to a recovery perspective and might be useful for tracing intervention improvements. Experts highlight the CIBD's unique contributions, including the suicidality scale encompassing BD-specific risk factors, BD specifiers, and the assessment of clients' empowerment. Overall, the CIBD seems to be a promising innovative instrument for diagnosing and assessing BD.</p> | ||
| 540 | |a Copyright © Julieta Azevedo et al. | ||
| 546 | |a en | ||
| 655 | 7 | |a Research Article |2 local | |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u https://doi.org/10.17352/jnnsd.000056 |z Connect to this object online. |