4.5 Article

Test-retest reliability of the computer-assisted DIA-X-5 interview for mental disorders

Journal

BMC PSYCHIATRY
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12888-020-02653-6

Keywords

Retest reliability; DSM-5; CIDI; DIA-X; Clinical interview

Categories

Funding

  1. Faculty of Psychology
  2. Technische Universitat Dresden
  3. Federal Ministry of Education of Research [01ER1303, 01ER1703]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundThere is a need of comprehensive standardized diagnostic assessment tools of psychopathology that match recent changes in diagnostic classification systems, such as the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Therefore, the computer-assisted DIA-X-5 was developed and its test-retest reliability was explored. The DIA-X-5 is based on the DIA-X/M-CIDI (Diagnostisches Expertensystem fur psychische Storungen/Munich-Composite International Diagnostic Interview) which referred to the 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV).MethodsA convenience sample (N=60, age: 15-67) was interviewed twice with the computer-assisted DIA-X-5 interview, on average nine days apart, by trained and blinded interviewers. The DIA-X-5 is a standardized instrument for research purposes covering symptoms, syndromes and diagnoses from eleven classes of mental disorders according to the DSM-5 with matching F codes of the 10th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10).ResultsKappa values ranged from 0.90 for post-traumatic stress disorder to 0.30 for social anxiety disorder. For age of onset and age of recency, test-retest reliability as measured by intra-class correlation was satisfying with values above 0.90 for most disorders.ConclusionsTest-retest reliability of the DIA-X-5 syndromes and diagnoses were comparable to those of previous DSM-IV/DIA-X diagnoses for most disorders. Due to low case numbers for some diagnoses, further research in larger samples is required.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available