Retest stability of DSM-III-R diagnoses among adolescents using the diagnostic interview schedule for children (DISC-2.1C)

Abstract

Retest stability of DSM-III-R diagnoses was assessed using the DISC-2.1C with a sample of Anglo, African, and Hispanic American adolescent patients 12 to 17 years of age. Based on the kappa statistic, retest stability was fair for any disorder (kappa = .50), for any anxiety disorder (kappa = .44), for any affective disorder (kappa = .53), for any disruptive behavior disorder (kappa = .58), and for substance use disorders (kappa = .46). Although there was a trend for reliability to be somewhat higher for African Americans (kappa = .58) than for Anglos (kappa = .42) or Hispanics (kappa = .49), these differences were not statistically significant. In general, 15- to 17-year-olds had somewhat better reliability (kappa = .58) than did 12- to 14-year-olds (kappa = .44). Males had somewhat higher reliability (kappa = .63) than females (kappa = .43). These findings are congruent with those reported recently using the DISC-R (Schwab-Stone et al., 1993) and suggest that the DISC appears to be at least as reliable as other available child diagnostic instruments. In view of the fair-to-moderate levels of reliability of these instruments in general, future research should focus on the joint effects of instrument, subject, interviewer, and nomenclature on operating characteristics of diagnostic interview schedules, focusing in particular on factors affecting accurate recall and reporting of symptoms and episodes.

Antisocial Behavior and Affiliation With Deviant Peers

“…Specific to this study, for the DISC Version 2.3, unreliable or overly prevalent items were revised, questions were added to anticipate DSM-IV research criteria, long questions were shortened, and 338 HEINZE, TORO, URBERG questions about age and context of onset, impairment attributable to symptoms, and treatment were added (DISC Development Group, 2000). 1 The DISC has demonstrated good validity and reliability and has become a widely used research tool (Friman et al, 2000;McCaskill et al, 1998;Piacentini et al, 1993;Roberts, Solovitz, Chen, & Casat, 1996;Schaffer et al, 1993;Schwab-Stone et al, 1993). This study tabulated the number of conduct disorder and alcohol and other drug abuse or dependence symptoms endorsed by the participant as two separate indexes of adolescent antisocial behavior.…”

Trauma Exposure, Protective Factors, and Mental Health Functioning of Substance-Abusing and Dependent Juvenile Offenders

“…The DISC is a structured diagnostic interview designed to assess the intensity, duration, and incidence of DSM-III-R psychiatric symptomatology in children and adolescents. Although reports of reliability and validity of the DISC are varied (Edelstein, Alberts, & Estill, 1988;Roberts, Solovitz, Chen, & Casat, 1996), it has been shown to be a valid measure of child psychopathology (Rubio-Stipec et al, 1996) and to reliably differentiate psychiatric-referred from pediatricreferred children and disturbed from nondisturbed children (Costello, Edel-brock, & Costello, 1985). The diagnostic categories assessed by the DISC were divided into two broad dimensions: externalizing disorders (i.e., attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder) and internalizing disorders (all the other disorders from the list given earlier in this article).…”

An Item Response Theory Analysis of DSM-IV Conduct Disorder

“…Previous studies suggest that with the DISC, youths reports significantly more unique conduct disorder related information than their parents 29, and that the DISC is at least as reliable as other available child diagnostic instruments 30. Interviews were conducted by trained lay interviewers who met bi-weekly to discuss issues regarding standardization of interviews.…”