OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of categorically based versus dimensionally based scoring algorithms for a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV)-referenced teacher rating scale for assessing ADHD and commonly co-occurring conditions and to determine their relative agreement with ratings of symptom-induced impairment. METHOD: Teachers completed Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory-4R (CASI-4R) ratings for 1,092 youth (ages 6-18 years) referred to a child and adolescent psychiatry outpatient service. Caseness was determined according to DSM-IV symptom count (categorical model) and T-score (dimensional model) criteria. RESULTS: Agreement between symptom count and T-score cutoffs was generally good (kappa ≥ 0.61) for ADHD-Inattentive, ADHD-Hyperactive-Impulsive, ADHD-Combined (except adolescent females), Oppositional Defiant Disorder, and Conduct Disorder, but this was not the case for anxiety and depressive disorders where only 15% of kappas were good. Agreement of impairment cutoff with T-score and symptom count cutoffs ranged from poor to good. CONCLUSION: In general, although in many cases CASI-4R categorical and dimensional scoring algorithms generated similar results, there was considerable variability across disorders, age groups, scoring method, and in some cases, gender. Moreover, symptom counts and T-scores are not a proxy for assessing impairment suggesting that each scoring strategy likely provides unique information for clinical decision-making.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of categorically based versus dimensionally based scoring algorithms for a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV)-referenced teacher rating scale for assessing ADHD and commonly co-occurring conditions and to determine their relative agreement with ratings of symptom-induced impairment. METHOD: Teachers completed Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory-4R (CASI-4R) ratings for 1,092 youth (ages 6-18 years) referred to a child and adolescent psychiatry outpatient service. Caseness was determined according to DSM-IV symptom count (categorical model) and T-score (dimensional model) criteria. RESULTS: Agreement between symptom count and T-score cutoffs was generally good (kappa ≥ 0.61) for ADHD-Inattentive, ADHD-Hyperactive-Impulsive, ADHD-Combined (except adolescent females), Oppositional Defiant Disorder, and Conduct Disorder, but this was not the case for anxiety and depressive disorders where only 15% of kappas were good. Agreement of impairment cutoff with T-score and symptom count cutoffs ranged from poor to good. CONCLUSION: In general, although in many cases CASI-4R categorical and dimensional scoring algorithms generated similar results, there was considerable variability across disorders, age groups, scoring method, and in some cases, gender. Moreover, symptom counts and T-scores are not a proxy for assessing impairment suggesting that each scoring strategy likely provides unique information for clinical decision-making.
Authors: Ronald M Rapee; Susan M Bőgels; Cathy M van der Sluis; Michelle G Craske; Thomas Ollendick Journal: J Child Psychol Psychiatry Date: 2011-11-08 Impact factor: 8.982
Authors: Michael Gordon; Kevin Antshel; Stephen Faraone; Russell Barkley; Larry Lewandowski; James J Hudziak; Joseph Biederman; Charles Cunningham Journal: J Atten Disord Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 3.256
Authors: Glorisa Canino; Patrick E Shrout; Maritza Rubio-Stipec; Hector R Bird; Milagros Bravo; Rafael Ramirez; Ligia Chavez; Margarita Alegria; José J Bauermeister; Ann Hohmann; Julio Ribera; Pedro Garcia; Alfonso Martinez-Taboas Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2004-01
Authors: Mian-Li Ong; Eric A Youngstrom; Jesselyn Jia-Xin Chua; Tate F Halverson; Sarah M Horwitz; Amy Storfer-Isser; Thomas W Frazier; Mary A Fristad; L Eugene Arnold; Mary L Phillips; Boris Birmaher; Robert A Kowatch; Robert L Findling Journal: J Abnorm Child Psychol Date: 2017-04