Criterion validity of the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Version 2.3 (DISC-2.3).

OBJECTIVE To examine the criterion validity of the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC) Version 2.3 in the NIMH Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental Disorders (MECA) Study, using a design that permitted several comparisons of DISC-generated diagnoses with diagnoses based on clinician symptom ratings. METHOD Two hundred forty-seven youths were selected from the 1,285 parent-youth pairs that constituted the four-site MECA sample. Subjects who screened positive for any of the five diagnostic areas under investigation in the validity study (attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, depressive disorder, and the major anxiety disorders) were recruited, as well as a comparable number of screen negatives. Clinicians reinterviewed separately both the youth and the primary caregiver using the DISC followed by a clinical-style interview, and then they rated the presence of symptoms and impairment. Computer algorithms combined this information into diagnoses using comparable rules for both DISC and clinical rating diagnoses. RESULTS In general, the DISC showed moderate to good validity across a number of diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS Results suggest some specific diagnostic areas in which further revision of the DISC is warranted. Three main sources of variability in DISC-clinician diagnostic agreement were evident over and above that due to the instrument itself, including (1) the informant used, (2) the algorithm applied in synthesizing symptom reports, and (3) the design of the validity comparison.

[1]  M Davies,et al.  The NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Version 2.3 (DISC-2.3): description, acceptability, prevalence rates, and performance in the MECA Study. Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental Disorders Study. , 1996, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

[2]  M. Weissman,et al.  The NIMH Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental Disorders (MECA) Study: background and methodology. , 1996, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

[3]  P. Shrout,et al.  The Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC-2.1) in Spanish: reliability in a Hispanic population. , 1996, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[4]  G. Canino,et al.  Test-retest reliability of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC 2.1). Parent, child, and combined algorithms. , 1995, Archives of general psychiatry.

[5]  M. Schwab-Stone,et al.  Determinants of reliability in psychiatric surveys of children aged 6-12. , 1994, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[6]  M. Schwab-Stone,et al.  Reliability of diagnostic reporting for children aged 6-11 years: a test-retest study of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-Revised. , 1994, The American journal of psychiatry.

[7]  P. Szatmari,et al.  Evaluation of the diagnostic interview for children and adolescents for use in general population samples , 1993, Journal of abnormal child psychology.

[8]  G. Canino,et al.  The Spanish translation and cultural adaptation of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC) in Puerto Rico , 1993, Culture, medicine and psychiatry.

[9]  J. Piacentini,et al.  Sensitivity of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children, 2nd edition (DISC-2.1) for specific diagnoses of children and adolescents. , 1993, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

[10]  M. Davies,et al.  The Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-Revised Version (DISC-R): III. Concurrent criterion validity. , 1993, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

[11]  M Davies,et al.  The Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-Revised Version (DISC-R): I. Preparation, field testing, interrater reliability, and acceptability. , 1993, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

[12]  K. Hodges Structured interviews for assessing children. , 1993, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[13]  C. Vélez,et al.  Comparison of DISC and K-SADS-P interviews of an epidemiological sample of children. , 1987, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

[14]  L. Robins Epidemiology: reflections on testing the validity of psychiatric interviews. , 1985, Archives of general psychiatry.

[15]  A. Farmer,et al.  A comparison of clinical and diagnostic interview schedule diagnoses. Physician reexamination of lay-interviewed cases in the general population. , 1985, Archives of general psychiatry.

[16]  M. Folstein,et al.  Comparison of the lay Diagnostic Interview Schedule and a standardized psychiatric diagnosis. Experience in eastern Baltimore. , 1985, Archives of general psychiatry.

[17]  A. Costello,et al.  Age differences in the reliability of the psychiatric interview of the child. , 1985, Child development.

[18]  James Robert Brašić,et al.  A children's global assessment scale (CGAS). , 1983, Archives of general psychiatry.

[19]  L. Robins,et al.  National Institute of Mental Health Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Its history, characteristics, and validity. , 1981, Archives of general psychiatry.

[20]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1973 .

[21]  Jacob Cohen A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .