Elie Cheniaux1, J Landeira-Fernandez, Marcio Versiani. 1. Institute of Psychiatry, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (IPUB/UFRJ), and School of Medical Sciences, State University of Rio de Janeiro (FCM/UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. echeniaux@gmail.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present study investigated the interrater reliability of the diagnoses of schizophrenia (SCH), schizoaffective disorder (SAD), bipolar disorder (BPD) and unipolar depression (UPD) according to both DSM-IV and ICD-10, as well as the diagnostic congruence between the two classificatory systems. SAMPLING AND METHODS: Using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, two trained psychiatrists simultaneously evaluated 100 inpatients and independently assessed the psychiatric diagnoses. The Cohen's kappa coefficient was employed to estimate interrater reliability and diagnostic congruence between DSM-IV and ICD-10. RESULTS: SCH was more frequent according to ICD-10 than DSM-IV criteria. Considering both diagnostic systems, all the four nosological categories, but ICD-10 SAD and DSM-IV UPD, were associated with interrater reliability coefficients above 0.50. The coefficient of the diagnostic congruence between DSM-IV and ICD-10 was inferior to 0.50 only for SAD. BPD was associated with the highest degrees of both interrater reliability and diagnostic congruence. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of an item excluding the occurrence of an affective syndrome among ICD-10 diagnostic criteria for SCH can account for: the larger frequency of SCH according to ICD-10 than DSM-IV; the unsatisfactory interrater reliability for the diagnosis of ICD-10 SAD, and the low diagnostic congruence for SAD.
BACKGROUND: The present study investigated the interrater reliability of the diagnoses of schizophrenia (SCH), schizoaffective disorder (SAD), bipolar disorder (BPD) and unipolar depression (UPD) according to both DSM-IV and ICD-10, as well as the diagnostic congruence between the two classificatory systems. SAMPLING AND METHODS: Using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, two trained psychiatrists simultaneously evaluated 100 inpatients and independently assessed the psychiatric diagnoses. The Cohen's kappa coefficient was employed to estimate interrater reliability and diagnostic congruence between DSM-IV and ICD-10. RESULTS: SCH was more frequent according to ICD-10 than DSM-IV criteria. Considering both diagnostic systems, all the four nosological categories, but ICD-10 SAD and DSM-IV UPD, were associated with interrater reliability coefficients above 0.50. The coefficient of the diagnostic congruence between DSM-IV and ICD-10 was inferior to 0.50 only for SAD. BPD was associated with the highest degrees of both interrater reliability and diagnostic congruence. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of an item excluding the occurrence of an affective syndrome among ICD-10 diagnostic criteria for SCH can account for: the larger frequency of SCH according to ICD-10 than DSM-IV; the unsatisfactory interrater reliability for the diagnosis of ICD-10 SAD, and the low diagnostic congruence for SAD.
Authors: Esther I de Bruin; Pieter F A de Nijs; Frank C Verhulst; Anja C Huizink Journal: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2012-07-18 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: Marucela Juana Uscamayta Ayvar; Rodolfo Sanchez Garrafa; Javier I Escobar; Gabriel A de Erausquin Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 19.242
Authors: Mirko Manchia; Mazda Adli; Nirmala Akula; Raffaella Ardau; Jean-Michel Aubry; Lena Backlund; Claudio Em Banzato; Bernhard T Baune; Frank Bellivier; Susanne Bengesser; Joanna M Biernacka; Clara Brichant-Petitjean; Elise Bui; Cynthia V Calkin; Andrew Tai Ann Cheng; Caterina Chillotti; Sven Cichon; Scott Clark; Piotr M Czerski; Clarissa Dantas; Maria Del Zompo; J Raymond Depaulo; Sevilla D Detera-Wadleigh; Bruno Etain; Peter Falkai; Louise Frisén; Mark A Frye; Jan Fullerton; Sébastien Gard; Julie Garnham; Fernando S Goes; Paul Grof; Oliver Gruber; Ryota Hashimoto; Joanna Hauser; Urs Heilbronner; Rebecca Hoban; Liping Hou; Stéphane Jamain; Jean-Pierre Kahn; Layla Kassem; Tadafumi Kato; John R Kelsoe; Sarah Kittel-Schneider; Sebastian Kliwicki; Po-Hsiu Kuo; Ichiro Kusumi; Gonzalo Laje; Catharina Lavebratt; Marion Leboyer; Susan G Leckband; Carlos A López Jaramillo; Mario Maj; Alain Malafosse; Lina Martinsson; Takuya Masui; Philip B Mitchell; Frank Mondimore; Palmiero Monteleone; Audrey Nallet; Maria Neuner; Tomás Novák; Claire O'Donovan; Urban Osby; Norio Ozaki; Roy H Perlis; Andrea Pfennig; James B Potash; Daniela Reich-Erkelenz; Andreas Reif; Eva Reininghaus; Sara Richardson; Guy A Rouleau; Janusz K Rybakowski; Martin Schalling; Peter R Schofield; Oliver K Schubert; Barbara Schweizer; Florian Seemüller; Maria Grigoroiu-Serbanescu; Giovanni Severino; Lisa R Seymour; Claire Slaney; Jordan W Smoller; Alessio Squassina; Thomas Stamm; Jo Steele; Pavla Stopkova; Sarah K Tighe; Alfonso Tortorella; Gustavo Turecki; Naomi R Wray; Adam Wright; Peter P Zandi; David Zilles; Michael Bauer; Marcella Rietschel; Francis J McMahon; Thomas G Schulze; Martin Alda Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 3.240