Psychiatric diagnostic interviews for children and adolescents: a comparative study.
ABSTRACT To compare examples of three styles of psychiatric interviews for youth: the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC) ("respondent-based"), the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment (CAPA) ("interviewer-based"), and the Development and Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA) ("expert judgment").
Roughly equal numbers of males and females of white and African American ethnicity, aged 9 to 12 and 13 to 16 years, were recruited from primary care pediatric clinics. Participants (N = 646) were randomly assigned to receive two of the three interviews, in counterbalanced order. Five modules were used: any depressive disorder, anxiety disorders, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. At two sessions about 1 week apart, parent and child completed one of two interviews plus five screening questionnaires.
When interviewed with the DAWBA, 17.7% of youth had one or more diagnoses, compared with 47.1% (DISC) and 32.4% (CAPA). The excess of DISC diagnoses was accounted for by specific phobias. Agreement between interview pairs was 0.13 to 0.48 for DAWBA-DISC comparisons, 0.21 to 0.61 for DISC-CAPA comparisons, and 0.23 to 0.48 for CAPA-DAWBA comparisons. DAWBA-only cases were associated with higher parent-report questionnaire scores than DISC/DAWBA cases, but equivalent child-report scores.
The DAWBA is shorter and cases were probably more severe, making it a good choice for clinical trials, but the user cannot examine the data in detail. The DISC and CAPA are similar in length and training needs. Either would be a better choice where false-negative results must be avoided, as in case-control genetic studies, or when researchers need to study individual symptoms in detail.
Article: The use of the development and well-being assessment (DAWBA) in clinical practice: a randomized trial.[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The development and well-being assessment (DAWBA) has been used in various epidemiological studies, whereas the clinical value of the instrument needs support from further studies. In particular, it is important to document how the use of the DAWBA influences clinical decision-making. The present study employed the DAWBA in a consecutive series of 270 new referrals to a large public child and adolescent psychiatric service in Zurich, Switzerland. ICD-10 based diagnoses were obtained from clinicians for all patients and reliability of DAWBA expert raters was calculated. The DAWBA diagnoses were randomly disclosed (n = 144) or not disclosed (n = 126) before clinical decision-making. The reliability of DAWBA expert diagnoses was very satisfactory and the agreement under the disclosed versus the non-disclosed condition amounted to 77 versus 68 % for internalizing disorders and to 63 versus 71 % for externalizing disorders. The increment in agreement due to disclosure of the DAWBA diagnosis was significant for internalizing disorders. Access to DAWBA information was more likely to prompt clinicians to add an extra diagnosis. Professional background and degree of clinical experience did not affect diagnostic agreement. Overall, diagnostic agreements between DAWBA expert diagnoses and clinical diagnoses were in the fair to moderate range and comparable to previous studies with other structured diagnostic interviews. The inclusion of the DAWBA into the clinical assessment process had an impact on diagnostic decision-making regarding internalizing disorders but not regarding externalizing disorders.European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 06/2012; 21(10):559-67. · 2.82 Impact Factor