Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the kiddie-schedule for affective disorders and schizophrenia-present and lifetime version DSM-5 (K-SADS-PL-C DSM-5)

Background: As the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fifth version (DSM-5) was published, the Kiddie-Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia-Present and Lifetime version (K-SADS-PL) was modified to adapt the new version (K-SADS-PL DSM-5). We translated it to Chinese (K-SADS-PL-C DSM-5) and described its reliability and validity. Methods: A total of 154 groups of 6 to 18-year-old children and their guardians were included. Trained interviewers interviewed subjects using the K-SADS-PL-C DSM-5. Interrater reliability was assessed by audio recording. Parent-reported scales, like child behavior checklist (CBCL), the Chinese version of Swan-son Nolan and Pelham, version IV scale-parent form (SNAP-IV), social responsiveness scale (SRS-1), and children-reported scales like depression self-rating scale for children (DSRSC) and the screen for child anxiety related emotional disorders (SCARED) were used to examine the validity of depressive disorder, ADHD, ASD, and ODD. Results: The K-SADS-PL-C DSM-5 had fair to excellent interrater (0.537-1.000) and test-retest (0.468-0.885) reliability of affective disorder and neurodevelopment disorder. The convergent validity of affective disorder and neurodevelopment disorder was good, and their divergent validity was acceptable. Limitations: i) Clinical questionnaires were insensitive in classifying disorders and had limitations in derived diagnoses. ii) Samples only came from clinical environment, iii) covered limited disease species, and iv) were small. Conclusion: The K-SADS-PL-C DSM-5 can support reliable and valid diagnoses for children with affect, neurodevelopmental, and behavioral disorders in China.

Automated summary

This study translated and described the reliability and validity of the diagnostic tool K-SADS-PL-C DSM-5 for children with mental disorders and schizophrenia in China. The results showed that this tool had high interrater and test-retest reliability, as well as good convergent and divergent validity.