U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Comparing DISC-IV and Clinician Diagnoses Among Youths Receiving Public Mental Health Services

NCJ Number
199332
Journal
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Volume: 42 Issue: 3 Dated: March 2003 Pages: 349-356
Author(s)
Caroline M. Lewczyk; Ann F. Garland; Michael S. Hurlburt; James Gearity; Richard L. Hough
Date Published
March 2003
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This study compared the prevalence and agreement of DSM-IV diagnoses based on the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Version IV (DISC-IV) and clinician assignment for youths who were receiving public mental health services between 1996 and 1997; the study also examined potential predictors of diagnostic agreement between these two assessment methods.
Abstract
The sample consisted of 240 youths aged 6- to 18-years old. Past-year prevalence rates were calculated for four diagnostic categories: anxiety, mood, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and disruptive behavior disorders (DBD). Potential predictors of diagnostic agreement were examined with logistic regression analysis. The study found that the prevalence of ADHD, DBD, and anxiety disorders was significantly higher when measured with the DISC-IV, and the prevalence of mood disorders was significantly higher in the clinician assignment. Diagnostic agreement overall was poor. Significant predictors of agreement varied by diagnosis and included symptom severity, comorbidity, youth age and gender, and school-based problem identification. These findings are consistent with previous findings of poor diagnostic agreement between structured interviews and clinician assessment. This circumstance calls for a better understanding of the factors that affect diagnostic assignment across different diagnostic methods. This is especially important if researchers continue to use structured interviews to determine prevalence, establish diagnosis-based treatment guidelines, and disseminate evidence-based treatments to community mental health settings. 4 tables and 36 references