Acceptance of Structured Diagnostic Interviews for Mental Disorders in Clinical Practice and Research Settings

Suppiger, Andrea; In‐Albon, Tina; Hendriksen, Stephanie; Hermann, Ernst; Margraf, Jürgen; Schneider, Silvia

doi:10.1016/j.beth.2008.07.002

Cited by 65 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings therefore raise questions about whether those practices are being applied to appropriate clients and suggest a need for efforts to improve clinician diagnostic practices. Despite data indicating that patients actually prefer structured approaches (Suppiger et al, 2009), practitioners rarely use SDIs (Jensen-Doss & Hawley, 2011), likely due to time and funding challenges associated with training in and administerting these time intensive measures. A hybrid approach, combining checklists and other brief assessments to indicate targets for intensive interviewing, might offer the benefits of structured approaches at less cost in terms of time, while preserving some flexibility for the clinician (Ebesutani, Bernstein, Chorpita, & Weisz, 2012; Youngstrom, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors and moderators of agreement between clinical and research diagnoses for children and adolescents.

Jensen‐Doss¹,

Youngstrom²,

Youngstrom³

et al. 2014

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Diagnoses play an important role in treatment planning and monitoring, but extensive research has shown low agreement between clinician-generated diagnoses and those from structured diagnostic interviews. However, most prior studies of agreement have not used research diagnoses based on gold standard methods, and research needs to identify characteristics of diagnostically challenging clients. This study examined agreement between youth diagnoses generated through the research-based LEAD (Longitudinal, Expert, and All Data) Standard to clinician diagnoses. Method Participants were 391 families seeking outpatient community mental health services for youths ages 6-18 (39.1% female, 88.2% African American). Youths and parents completed research interviews and clinic diagnoses were extracted from clinic records. LEAD diagnoses synthesized results of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children- Present and Lifetime (KSADS-PL) and the youth's developmental, family, and psychiatric history. Results Agreement between the LEAD and chart diagnoses was low, not exceeding “poor” agreement for most diagnostic categories (κ = .10-.46, median = .37). Disagreement was largely driven by missed diagnoses, although clinicians also did assign extra diagnoses for some clients. Fewer diagnostic errors occurred when the youth's clinical picture was more clear (e.g., high or low symptom severity, lower comorbidity), when the youth was older, when the family was higher functioning, and when the parent had more depression. However, youth and family characteristics explained very little of the variability in diagnostic errors. Conclusions Results support the need to investigate strategies to improve clinician diagnostic accuracy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors and moderators of agreement between clinical and research diagnoses for children and adolescents.

Jensen‐Doss¹,

Youngstrom²,

Youngstrom³

et al. 2014

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…44 More structured methods are faster and easier to use consistently, and are surprisingly popular with patients. 121 It is important to check for mood episodes in the context of developmental history at the outset of the interview. Few methods provide a clear algorithm for CycD or OS-BRD—a key omission given the data on prevalence and burden.…”

Section: | Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The International Society for Bipolar Disorders Task Force report on pediatric bipolar disorder: Knowledge to date and directions for future research

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Over the past two decades, there has been tremendous growth in research regarding bipolar disorder (BD) among children and adolescents (ie, pediatric BD [PBD]). The primary purpose of this article is to distill the extant literature, dispel myths or exaggerated assertions in the field, and disseminate clinically relevant findings. Methods An international group of experts completed a selective review of the literature, emphasizing areas of consensus, identifying limitations and gaps in the literature, and highlighting future directions to mitigate these gaps. Results Substantial, and increasingly international, research has accumulated regarding the phenomenology, differential diagnosis, course, treatment, and neurobiology of PBD. Prior division around the role of irritability and of screening tools in diagnosis has largely abated. Gold-standard pharmacologic trials inform treatment of manic/mixed episodes, whereas fewer data address bipolar depression and maintenance/continuation treatment. Adjunctive psychosocial treatment provides a forum for psychoeducation and targets primarily depressive symptoms. Numerous neurocognitive and neuroimaging studies, and increasing peripheral biomarker studies, largely converge with prior findings from adults with BD. Conclusions As data have accumulated and controversy has dissipated, the field has moved past existential questions about PBD toward defining and pursuing pressing clinical and scientific priorities that remain. The overall body of evidence supports the position that perceptions about marked international (US vs elsewhere) and developmental (pediatric vs adult) differences have been overstated, although additional research on these topics is warranted. Traction toward improved outcomes will be supported by continued emphasis on pathophysiology and novel therapeutics.

show abstract

“…[54,55] In addition, the interview has demonstrated high validity [56,57] as well as good acceptance in clinical practice and research settings. [58] Interviewers, training procedure, and supervision. Interviewers were clinical psychologists, physicians, or advanced graduate students of clinical psychology.…”

Section: Procedures and Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health anxiety and fear of fear in panic disorder and agoraphobia vs. social phobia: a prospective longitudinal study

et al. 2010

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Acceptance of Structured Diagnostic Interviews for Mental Disorders in Clinical Practice and Research Settings

Cited by 65 publications

References 9 publications

Predictors and moderators of agreement between clinical and research diagnoses for children and adolescents.

Predictors and moderators of agreement between clinical and research diagnoses for children and adolescents.

The International Society for Bipolar Disorders Task Force report on pediatric bipolar disorder: Knowledge to date and directions for future research

Health anxiety and fear of fear in panic disorder and agoraphobia vs. social phobia: a prospective longitudinal study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About