<p>I couldn't find the SCID anywhere on the web. So i did some digging I found one literature search that used the DSM SCID as an example of a semi-structured interview from which GF data could be found (H Monrad, 2014). I also found that DSM- 5 had removed the GF scale (Gold, 2014), but presumably the alternative measures the same properties. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF), the previously
  endorsed numerical rating scale used for assessment of functioning and
  reported on Axis V, has been eliminated. In its place, DSM-5 offers
  psychiatrists a new tool for assessment of global functioning and
  impairment, the World Health Organization Disability Assessment
  Schedule 2 (WHODAS 2.0).</p>
</blockquote>

<p>And finallly I found a study by Aas which looks at rating the GF assesment, in which they reference a study by Williams which looks at the test retest reliability of the SCID. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Rating GAF may mean choosing the lowest score for other specified time periods, for example the lowest level in the past month or for the worst week during the month prior to interview (Williams et al, 1992). </p>
</blockquote>

<p>Based on the above it is reasonable to conclude that the SCID contains a measure for GF, even if it now called WHODAS. </p>

<p><a href="http://annals-general-psychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1744-859X-10-2" rel="nofollow">Aas, I. M. (2011). Guidelines for rating global assessment of functioning (GAF). Annals of general psychiatry, 10(1), 1.</a></p>

<p><a href="http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/495832" rel="nofollow">Williams, J. B., Gibbon, M., First, M. B., Spitzer, R. L., Davies, M., Borus, J., ... &amp; Wittchen, H. U. (1992). The structured clinical interview for DSM-III-R (SCID): II. Multisite test-retest reliability. Archives of general psychiatry, 49(8), 630-636.</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.jaapl.org/content/42/2/173.full" rel="nofollow">Gold, L. H. (2014). DSM-5 and the assessment of functioning: the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 42(2), 173-181.</a></p>

<p><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4287015/" rel="nofollow">H Monrad Aas, I. (2014). Collecting Information for Rating Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF): Sources of Information and Methods for Information Collection. Current psychiatry reviews, 10(4), 330-347.</a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-07T08:48:39.600Z
2016-10-07T08:48:39.600Z
queenslug
<p>I know for a fact that it generates evaluation measures of symptom clusters.</p>

<p>I assume that it would also show global functioning patterns because it rates the severity of client symptoms, from which it would be easy to calculate a metric for Global Functioning.</p>

<p>Source: I am in my last year of study to become a psychologist.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-06T07:48:28.330Z
Sources should ideally be drawn from the scientific literature, or credible web sites.
AliceD
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-06T14:35:06.223Z
@Christiaan Well the question was asked a year ago. Given the length of time that has passed, I don't think another answer is forthcoming. I don't have a source other than four years of study, but I feel that my knowledge is better than no answer at all here.
nhouser9
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-06T19:13:14.537Z
Agreed, but only partly - Firstly, if you've soaked up the materials of 4 years of study, you should have easy access to the used sources. Secondly, I've got 35 revival badges and all those answers were based on credible sources, allowing other users to background read on the topic. Lastly, although *an* answer may be better than no answer, a sourced answer is always better than a few unfounded lines. Everybody can claim their heading to an MSc. We encourage elaborate and complete answers. As of now, it's more of a comment, really. Also, adding sources will likely get you some upvotes.
AliceD
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-10-05T23:31:59.400Z
2016-10-05T23:31:59.400Z
nhouser9
<p>I suspect that only licensed psychiatrists get to see the contents of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM (SCID). I am drafting a proposal currently and need to know if the data I am applying for access to use has the data structures I need for my experiment. I need to know that the SCID generates evaluation measures of symptom clusters from disorder types in the DSM AND a measure of <em>Global Functioning</em>. Is this the case? What does phenotypic SCID data look like?</p>

<psychology><data>
Does the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM contain a Global Assessment of Functioning measure?
lrthistlethwaite
# Does the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM contain a Global Assessment of Functioning measure?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-09-15)

I suspect that only licensed psychiatrists get to see the contents of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM (SCID). I am drafting a proposal currently and need to know if the data I am applying for access to use has the data structures I need for my experiment. I need to know that the SCID generates evaluation measures of symptom clusters from disorder types in the DSM AND a measure of *Global Functioning*. Is this the case? What does phenotypic SCID data look like?

**Tags:** psychology, data


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2016-10-07. Score: 3 | Accepted answer

I couldn't find the SCID anywhere on the web. So i did some digging I found one literature search that used the DSM SCID as an example of a semi-structured interview from which GF data could be found (H Monrad, 2014). I also found that DSM- 5 had removed the GF scale (Gold, 2014), but presumably the alternative measures the same properties.

> the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF), the previously
> endorsed numerical rating scale used for assessment of functioning and
> reported on Axis V, has been eliminated. In its place, DSM-5 offers
> psychiatrists a new tool for assessment of global functioning and
> impairment, the World Health Organization Disability Assessment
> Schedule 2 (WHODAS 2.0).

And finallly I found a study by Aas which looks at rating the GF assesment, in which they reference a study by Williams which looks at the test retest reliability of the SCID.

> Rating GAF may mean choosing the lowest score for other specified time periods, for example the lowest level in the past month or for the worst week during the month prior to interview (Williams et al, 1992).

Based on the above it is reasonable to conclude that the SCID contains a measure for GF, even if it now called WHODAS.

[Aas, I. M. (2011). Guidelines for rating global assessment of functioning (GAF). Annals of general psychiatry, 10(1), 1.](http://annals-general-psychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1744-859X-10-2)

[Williams, J. B., Gibbon, M., First, M. B., Spitzer, R. L., Davies, M., Borus, J., ... & Wittchen, H. U. (1992). The structured clinical interview for DSM-III-R (SCID): II. Multisite test-retest reliability. Archives of general psychiatry, 49(8), 630-636.](http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/495832)

[Gold, L. H. (2014). DSM-5 and the assessment of functioning: the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 42(2), 173-181.](http://www.jaapl.org/content/42/2/173.full)

[H Monrad Aas, I. (2014). Collecting Information for Rating Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF): Sources of Information and Methods for Information Collection. Current psychiatry reviews, 10(4), 330-347.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4287015/)


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2016-10-05. Score: 0

I know for a fact that it generates evaluation measures of symptom clusters.

I assume that it would also show global functioning patterns because it rates the severity of client symptoms, from which it would be easy to calculate a metric for Global Functioning.

Source: I am in my last year of study to become a psychologist.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: Sources should ideally be drawn from the scientific literature, or credible web sites.  
> **username_2**: @Christiaan Well the question was asked a year ago. Given the length of time that has passed, I don't think another answer is forthcoming. I don't have a source other than four years of study, but I feel that my knowledge is better than no answer at all here.  
> **username_3**: Agreed, but only partly - Firstly, if you've soaked up the materials of 4 years of study, you should have easy access to the used sources. Secondly, I've got 35 revival badges and all those answers were based on credible sources, allowing other users to background read on the topic. Lastly, although *an* answer may be better than no answer, a sourced answer is always better than a few unfounded lines. Everybody can claim their heading to an MSc. We encourage elaborate and complete answers. As of now, it's more of a comment, really. Also, adding sources will likely get you some upvotes.  

---

