Validity of the Swedish SCID and ADDIS diagnostic interviews for substance use disorders: sensitivity and specificity compared with a LEAD golden standard (original) (raw)
Related papers
Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 2015
The purpose of this study was to employ the criteria for alcohol use disorder (AUD), according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), in a general population sample and to compare the diagnostic classifications and prevalence with those of DSM-IV, DSM-III-R, and the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10). Method: We used a stratified random sample of 1,091 participants (ages 18-64) in Stockholm County, who were interviewed between 1998 and 2002. A semistructured interview was conducted using Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry. Diagnoses were made according to DSM-5, DSM-IV, DSM-III-R, and ICD-10. Agreement was studied using Cohen's. Results: The prevalence of DSM-5 AUD was 11.0%, with corresponding dependence or abuse/harm diagnosis being 8.7% for DSM-IV, 8.5% for DSM-III-R, and 4.9% for ICD-10. With the shift from DSM-IV to DSM-5, 3.2% of those with no disorder were reclassified as mild AUD, whereas 28.9% of those with DSM-IV abuse were reclassified as having no disorder. The majority of the "new cases" had two DSM-IV dependence criteria, and few endorsed the new DSM-5 craving criteria. Cohen's between DSM-5 AUD and dependence or abuse/harm was as follows: DSM-IV, .84, DSM-III-R, .83, and ICD-10, .62. These findings were lower than the between the older systems: between DSM-IV and DSM-III-R, .98, between DSM-IV and ICD-10, .70, and between DSM-III-R and ICD-10, .72. Conclusions: In the present study population, there were more undiagnosed DSM-IV cases being diagnosed as AUD using DSM-5 than vice versa, but in total the number of cases increased moderately when going from DSM-IV to DSM-5. Concerning reliability, there are substantial to almost perfect agreements between DSM-5 classifications of AUDs and those of DSM-IV, DSM-III-R, and ICD-10.
Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy, 2015
This study investigates test-retest and inter-item consistency of Alcohol Drog Diagnos InStrument (ADDIS), a structured interview to diagnose substance use disorders according to ICD-10, DSM-IV and DSM-5. ADDIS, the Swedish version of SUDDS, is the only instrument in Swedish that produces diagnostic proposals specific to all drug categories, and for all three diagnostic systems. Screening of stressful life events, anxiety, and depression is also included. Thirty patients at addiction treatment facilities were interviewed for diagnostic assessment and re-interviewed after one week. ADDIS has excellent internal consistency. There is also very high test-retest correlation on number of fulfilled criteria for all diagnostic systems. Agreement of diagnostic proposals is substantial, mean absolute agreement is excellent, and mean systematic correlation is almost perfect. ADDIS is a reliable tool for specific diagnostic assessment of SUDs.
Comprehensive Psychiatry, 1995
Although structured diagnostic interviews are increasingly being used in substance abuse treatment settings, there has been limited systematic evaluation of their ability to enhance reliability and validity of psychiatric diagnoses. The present report provides data on the concurrent, discriminant, and predictive validity of current substance use disorders and common comorbid diagnoses in a sample of 100 substance abuse patients. Diagnoses formulated primarily by master'slevel clinicians in the usual course of their duties were compared with diagnoses formulated by research technicians using a semistructured interview. Results indicated that the validity of clinician diagnoses was good for substance use disorders, moderate for personality disorders, and poor for anxiety disorders and major depression. Greater validity was observed for substance abuse diagnoses formulated by research techniclans using the semistructured interview. Based on these findings, we conclude that psychiatric diagnosis in substance abuse patients may be improved by adding elements of structured interviews to the clinician's usual assessment.
Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 1997
This study was designed to examine the agreement of DSM-IV alcohol and drug use disorder diagnoses generated by three WHO/NIH diagnostic instruments, the AUDADIS-ADR, the CIDI, and the SCAN. This substudy, conducted in three countries, Greece, Luxembourg, and the United States, was part of the larger joint project on diagnosis and classification of mental disorders and alcohol and drug-related problems, which was initiated to evaluate the cross-cultural applicability of the instruments and the criteria. Overall, concordance among the three assessments was good for alcohol and opiate dependence, fair to good for cocaine and sedative dependence, and low for amphetamine dependence. Cannabis dependence concordance was significantly more discrepant than any other substance. Agreement on abuse was low for all substances examined. In addition, the concordance of DSM-IV criteria for each substance was examined. Finally, reasons for discrepancies in responses among assessments were examined, based on discrepancy interview protocol methodology. Further investigation will help to refine these instruments in order to provide a more thorough understanding of alcohol and drug abuse diagnoses.
The Reliability of the CIDI-SAM: a comprehensive substance abuse interview
Addiction, 1989
The CIDI-SAM is a fully-structured interview that ascertains DSM-III, DSM-III-R, Feighner, RDC and ICD-10 diagnoses for alcohol, tobacco and nine classes of psychoactive drugs, h was designed at the request of the WHO/ADAMHA Task Force on Psychiatric Assessment instruments to expand the substance abuse sections of the CIDI. Using a test-retest design, the diagnostic and item reliabilities of this instrument were tested in a sample of 39 patients in substance abuse treatment at three St. Louis treatment facilities. Kappa values and their 95% confidence intervals, and Yule's Y values are reported. The average kappa for DSM-III substance disorders was 0.84, for DSM-III-R it was 0.82. We report, on the average, excellent kappa values for individual alcohol and drug symptoms. We also ascertained from the respondent's themselves the reasons why answers to specific questions might have been discordant. The findings from this unique,‘discrepancy interview’are reported.
General Hospital Psychiatry, 1997
A structured interview, ADDIS (Alkohol Drag Di-agnos Instrument), designed to assess substance use disorders, was included as a part of the intake protocol in a department of orthopedics at a general hospital. To evaluate both the effectiveness and feasibility of the new procedure, the attitudes of 29 staff members were sampled during followup interviews. In addition, a questionnaire was sent to 254 patients to examine their opinions about the interview. The staff made a global evaluation of the new routine on a 10-point scale, ranging from completely negative (I) to completely positive (10). The mean rating was 8.2 (range 5-10). The evaluations made by the staff members in the interviews were very positive. Of the 254 patients, 177 (70%) returned the questionnaire. More than 90% of the patients appreciated being asked about their use of analgesics and sedatives, and 77% felt it was positive to be asked about their alcohol use. The result of the patient questionnaire supports the feasibility of the routine, suggesting that a structured interview can be included in the intake protocol in order to improve the assessment of substance use disorders.
Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 2000
No existing diagnostic interview assesses severity of dependence based on DSM-IV criteria across a range of substances. The Substance Dependence Severity Scale (SDSS) was designed to serve this purpose, consisting of substance-specific scales of both severity and frequency of DSM-IV criteria. This study investigated the reliability and validity of the SDSS. The test-retest reliability of the SDSS in 175 (112 male and 63 female) treated substance users ranged from good to excellent for alcohol, cocaine, heroin and sedatives (interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs)= 0.75-0.88 for severity, 0.67-0.85 for frequency). Results for cannabis were lower, ranging from fair to good (ICCs = 0.50-0.62). Results for joint rating and internal consistency reliability were comparable to test-retest findings. In addition to indicators of concurrent validity, scale applications are presented and discussed.
Addictive Behaviors, 2007
Little research has been done on the development of brief screening instruments for the identification of persons meeting diagnostic criteria for drug dependence in non-clinical populations. In the work described in this paper, a new instrument, the Substance Dependence Screening Questionnaire (SDSQ), was drawn up and administered by interviewers to 554 subjects aged 18-34 years (65.9% women), and its results were compared with the diagnoses arrived at by expert clinicians using the Structured Clinical Interview of DSM-IVAxis I Disorders (Clinician Version) (SCID-CV). The SDSQ exhibited satisfactory agreement with SCID-CV (kappa = 0.904), and had a sensitivity of 0.914, a specificity of 0.990, positive and negative predictive values of 0.914 and 0.990, respectively, and positive and negative likelihood ratios of 90.65 and 0.087, respectively, for SCID-CV-diagnosed drug dependence. These results suggest that the new instrument may, as intended, prove useful for screening for substance dependence in nonclinical populations.