TY - JOUR
T1 - Case identification in psychiatric epidemiology
T2 - A review
AU - Eaton, William W.
AU - Hall, Alyson L.F.
AU - Macdonald, Ryan
AU - Mckibben, Jodi
N1 - Funding Information:
Preparation of this manuscript was supported by NIMH grants R01 MH 47447 and T32 14592.
PY - 2007/10
Y1 - 2007/10
N2 - Background: Psychiatric epidemiologic surveys since 1980 have relied heavily on a small number of survey diagnostic instruments for case ascertainment, which encode reports of respondents to highly structured interview questions delivered by interviewers without clinical training. Many validations of these survey diagnostic instruments have been carried out. Objective: This paper reviews the success of the survey diagnostic instruments, for eight diagnostic categories, in validations with a psychiatrist examination as the gold standard. Method: Public databases were searched for potentially relevant publications, of which more than 1000 were located. Tables show sensitivity, specificity, Kappa, sample source and size, survey instrument and validation method. Results: The number of validation studies relevant to the eight disorders ranged from 8 for schizophrenia to 29 for major depressive disorder. Reported sensitivities ranged from zero to 100%, and specificities from 22% to 100%. Conclusion: Results for common mental disorders such as major depressive disorder, alcohol disorder, drug disorder, and agoraphobic disorder are better than for panic disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia. The validity of case ascertainment in psychiatric epidemiology is still in question.
AB - Background: Psychiatric epidemiologic surveys since 1980 have relied heavily on a small number of survey diagnostic instruments for case ascertainment, which encode reports of respondents to highly structured interview questions delivered by interviewers without clinical training. Many validations of these survey diagnostic instruments have been carried out. Objective: This paper reviews the success of the survey diagnostic instruments, for eight diagnostic categories, in validations with a psychiatrist examination as the gold standard. Method: Public databases were searched for potentially relevant publications, of which more than 1000 were located. Tables show sensitivity, specificity, Kappa, sample source and size, survey instrument and validation method. Results: The number of validation studies relevant to the eight disorders ranged from 8 for schizophrenia to 29 for major depressive disorder. Reported sensitivities ranged from zero to 100%, and specificities from 22% to 100%. Conclusion: Results for common mental disorders such as major depressive disorder, alcohol disorder, drug disorder, and agoraphobic disorder are better than for panic disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia. The validity of case ascertainment in psychiatric epidemiology is still in question.
KW - Diagnosis
KW - Epidemiology
KW - Measurement
KW - Sensitivity
KW - Specificity
KW - Survey
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34848873735&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34848873735&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/09540260701564906
DO - 10.1080/09540260701564906
M3 - Review article
C2 - 17896230
AN - SCOPUS:34848873735
SN - 0954-0261
VL - 19
SP - 497
EP - 507
JO - International Review of Psychiatry
JF - International Review of Psychiatry
IS - 5
ER -