2004
DOI: 10.1177/0145445503258987
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Validity of the ADHD Section of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to assess the concurrent criterion validity of the attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) portion of the National Institute of Mental Health Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-IV (NIMHDISC-IV). Fifty-seven adolescent participants were divided into three groups on the basis of whether participants met criteria for ADHD on caretaker and adolescent responses on the DISC: (a) 18 participants for whom both the caretakers and adolescents endorsed ADHD, (b) 17 participan… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
(48 reference statements)
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Diagnostic assignment based exclusively on rating scale cutoff scores appears to be the least face valid method of grouping, considering the myriad disorders and conditions featuring attention and behavioral problems as core or secondary features (American Psychiatric Association 2000). Moreover, significant variability in symptom endorsement on structured and semistructured clinical interviews is not accounted for by rating scale endorsements (McGrath et al 2004); and none of the current scales or inventories obtain critical diagnostic information concerning symptom onset and course.…”
Section: Diagnostic Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Diagnostic assignment based exclusively on rating scale cutoff scores appears to be the least face valid method of grouping, considering the myriad disorders and conditions featuring attention and behavioral problems as core or secondary features (American Psychiatric Association 2000). Moreover, significant variability in symptom endorsement on structured and semistructured clinical interviews is not accounted for by rating scale endorsements (McGrath et al 2004); and none of the current scales or inventories obtain critical diagnostic information concerning symptom onset and course.…”
Section: Diagnostic Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Previous studies suggest that the psychometric properties (Kaufman et al 1997), including reliability and validity, of the K-SADS are excellent. As recommended in the K-SADS materials, responses were combined across raters by item, as is a common practice in many studies involving multiple raters (Kraemer et al 2003;McGrath et al 2004), incorporating clinical judgments based on all available information. In order to evaluate the role of persistent vs. remitted ADHD, the ADHD group was subdivided based on the results of K-SADS interview into those who continued to meet diagnostic criteria for ADHD ("Persisters" n=38) and those who did not ("Remitters" n=31).…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research assistants were trained to administer the DISC-IV to the parents, as well as a substance use section to the participants. The instrument has adequate reliability and validity evidence (McGrath, Handwerk, Armstrong, Lucas, & Friman, 2004;Shaffer et al, 2000), and has been widely used for diagnostic purposes in studies of children with ADHD (The MTA Cooperative Group, 1999).…”
Section: Measures Used To Determine Eligibilitymentioning
confidence: 99%