Advertisement

Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology

, Volume 46, Issue 8, pp 775–785 | Cite as

Measuring the level of diagnostic concordance and discordance between modules of the CIDI-Short Form and the CIDI-Auto 2.1

  • Matthew Sunderland
  • Gavin Andrews
  • Tim Slade
  • Lorna Peters
Original Paper

Abstract

Purpose

The Composite International Diagnostic Interview-Short Form (CIDI-SF) is a short disorder-specific diagnostic interview for common mental disorders. Many researchers have been attracted to the CIDI-SF because of its brevity and cost effectiveness. As a result, the CIDI-SF has been used in multiple epidemiological studies and clinical trials. Despite the widespread use, a search of literature has revealed relatively few validation studies. This investigation aims to provide estimates of concordance and discordance between the CIDI-SF disorder modules and the full CIDI, as well as providing evidence regarding the potential screening utility of the CIDI-SF.

Methods

The sample comprised 83 patients attending a tertiary referral clinic for anxiety disorders. Patients were administered the CIDI-SF and the full CIDI-Auto and estimates of agreement between the two measures were calculated. Interview transcripts were examined for cases that disagreed on a diagnosis to elicit a likely reason for the lack of agreement between the two measures. Finally, the screening properties of the dimensionally scored CIDI-SF were calculated and compared with the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale.

Results

The CIDI-SF tended to overestimate the rate of diagnoses as evidenced by a high degree of false positives. However, the CIDI-SF exhibited favorable screening properties (ruling out non-disordered cases).

Conclusions

These results suggest that caution must be taken when using the CIDI-SF as the sole diagnostic instrument in epidemiological research to estimate prevalence and incidence. The CIDI-SF may be more useful for screening out potential candidates in clinical research and psychopharmacological trials.

Keywords

Composite International Diagnostic Interview Concordance Discordance Validity Screening utility 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was funded in part by an Australian Post-graduate Award doctoral scholarship and NHMRC project grant no. 510137. The authors wish to report no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Adams PF, Marano MA (1995) Current estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, 1994. Vital and health statistics. Series 10, Data from the National Health Survey, pp 1–260Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kessler RC, McGonagle KA, Zhao S, Nelson CB, Hughes M, Eshleman S, Wittchen HU, Kendler KS (1994) Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of DSM-III-R psychiatric disorders in the United States: results from the National Comorbidity Survey. Arch Gen Psychiatry 51:8–19PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kessler RC, Andrews G, Mroczek DK, Ustun B, Wittchen H (1998) The World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview Short Form. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 7:171–185. doi: 10.1002/mpr.47 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Patten SB, Brandon-Christie J, Devji J, Sedmak B (2000) Performance of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview Short Form for major depression in a community sample. Chronic Dis Can 21:68–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bozzette SA, Berry SH, Duan N, Frankel MR, Leibowitz AA, Leftkowitz D, Emmons CA, Senterfitt JW, Berk ML, Morton SC, Shapiro MF (1998) The care of HIV-infected adults in the United States: HIV Cost and Services Utilization Study Consortium. New Engl J Med 339:1897–1904PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sturm R, Gresenz CR, Sherboume CD, Minnium K, Klap R, Bhattacharya J, Farley D, Young AS, Burnam MA, Wells KB (1999) The design of healthcare for communities: a study of health care delivery for alcohol, drug abuse, and mental health conditions. Inquiry 36:221–233PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Calbring P, Forslin P, Ljungstrand P, Willebrand M, Strandlund C, Ekselius L, Anderson G (2002) Is the internet-administered CIDI-SF equivalent to a clinician-administered SCID interview? Cogn Behav Ther 31:183–189. doi: 10.1080/165060702321138573 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Andersson G, Carlbring P, Kaldo V, Strom L (2004) Screening of psychiatric disorders via the Internet: a pilot study with tinnitus patients. Nord J Psychiatry 58:287–291. doi: 10.1080/08039480410005792 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jenkins R (2001) Making psychiatric epidemiology useful: the contribution of epidemiology to government policy. Acta Psychiatr Scand 103:2–14. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0447.2001.00004.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sayre SL, Evans M, Hokanson PS, Schmitz JM, Stotts AL, Averill P, Grabowski J (2004) “Who gets in?”: recruitment and screening processes of outpatient substance abuse trials. Addict Behav 29:389–398. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2003.08.010 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Adami H, Elliott A, Zetlmeisl M, McMahon R, Thaker G (2002) Use of telephone screens improves efficiency of healthy subject recruitment. Psychiatry Res 113:295–301. doi: 10.1016/S0165-1781(02)00265-2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Patten SB (1997) Performance of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview Short Form for major depression in community and clinical samples. Chronic Dis Can 18:109–112PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Patten SB (2001) Long-term medical conditions and major depression in a Canadian population study at waves 1 and 2. J Affect Disorders 63:35–41. doi: 10.1016/S0165-0327(00)00186-5 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aalto-Setala T, Haarasilta L, Marttunen M, Tuulio-Henriksson A, Poikolainen K, Aro H, Lonnqvist J (2002) Major depressive episode among young adults: CIDI-SF versus SCAN consensus diagnoses. Psychol Med 32:1309–1314. doi: 10.1017/S0033291702005810 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Orlando M, Burnam MA, Sherboume CD, Morton SC, London AS, Hays RD, Bing EG (2001) Brief screening of psychiatric disorders among a national sample of HIV-positive adults: concordance between the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and the CIDI Short form (CIDI-SF). Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 10:97–107. doi: 10.1002/mpr.104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Burnam MA, Bing EG, Morton SC, Sherbourne C, Fleishman JA, London AS, Vitiello B, Stein M, Bozzette SA, Shapiro MF (2001) Use of mental health and substance abuse treatment services among adults with HIV in the United States. Arch Gen Psychiatry 58:729–736PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lovibond PF, Lovibond SH (1995) The structure of negative emotional states: comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the beck depression and anxiety inventories. Behav Res Ther 33:335–342. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    World Health Organization (1997) CIDI-Auto 2.1: administrator’s guide and reference. World Health Organization, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Peters L, Andrews G (1995) Procedural validity of the computerized version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI-Auto) in the anxiety disorder. Psychol Med 25:1269–1280PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Peters L, Clark D, Carroll F (1998) Are computerized interviews equivalent to human interviewers? CIDI-Auto versus CIDI in anxiety and depressive disorders. Psychol Med 28:893–901PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Andrews G, Peters L (1998) The psychometric properties of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 33:80–88. doi: 10.1007/s001270050026 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Andrews G, Henderson S, Hall W (2001) Prevalence, comorbidity, disability and service utilization: overview of the Australian National Mental Health Survey. Br J Psychiatry 178:145–153. doi: 10.1192/bjp.178.2.145 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Antony MM, Cox BJ, Enns MW, Bieling PJ, Swinson RP (1998) Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychol Assess 10:176–181. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brown TA, Chorpita BF, Korotitsch W, Barlow DH (1997) Psychometric properties of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) in clinical samples. Behav Res Ther 35:79–89. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7967(96)00068-X PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD (1996) A 12-item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 34:220–233PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kraemer HC, Periyakoil VS, Noda A (2002) Kappa coefficients in medical research. Stat Med 21:2109–2129. doi: 10.1002/sim.1180 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gilchrist JM (2009) Weighted 2×2 kappa coefficients: recommended indices of diagnostic accuracy for evidence-based practice. J Clin Epidemiol 32:1045–1053Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kraemer HC (1979) Ramifications of a population model for kappa as a coefficient of reliability. Psychometrika 44:461–472. doi: 10.1007/BF02296208 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Streiner DL (2003) Diagnostic tests: using and misusing diagnostic and screening tests. J Pers Assess 81:209–219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV (1990) High agreement but low kappa: 1. The problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 43:543–549. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(90)90158-L PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Byrt T, Bishop J, Carlin JB (1993) Bias, prevalence and kappa. J Clin Epidemiol 46:423–429. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90018-V PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hoehler FK (2000) Bias and prevalence effects on kappa viewed in terms of sensitivity and specificity. J Clin Epidemiol 53:499–503. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00174-2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Swets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Streiner DL, Cairney J (2007) What’s under the ROC? An introduction to receiver operating characteristics curves. Can J Psychiatry 52:121–128PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Delong ER, Delong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44:837–845PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Andrews G (2002) A brief integer scorer for the SF-12: validity of the brief scorer in Australian community and clinic settings. Aust NZ J Publ Heal 26:508–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sunderland M, Slade T, Anderson TM, Peters L (2008) Impact of substance-induced and general medical condition exclusion criteria on the prevalence of common mental disorders as defined by the CIDI. Aust NZ J Psychiatry 42:898–904. doi: 10.1080/00048670802345508 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wittchen HU, Ustun TB, Kessler RC (1999) Diagnosing mental disorders in the community: a difference that matters? Psychol Med 29:1021–1027. doi: 10.1017/S0033291799008831 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Streiner D, Geddes J (1998) Some useful concepts and terms used in articles about diagnosis. Evid Based Mental Health 1:6–8. doi: 10.1136/ebmh.1.1.6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Collins D (2003) Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Qual Life Res 12:229–238. doi: 10.1023/A:1023254226592 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Smith TW (1991) Context effects in the general social survey. In: Beimer PP, Groves RM, Lyberg LE, Mathiowetz NA, Sudman S (eds) Measurement errors in surveys. Wiley-Interscience, pp 57–72Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Orlando M, Burnam MA, Beckman R, Morton SC, London AS, Bing EG, Fleishman JA (2002) Re-estimating the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in a nationally representative sample of persons receiving care for HIV: results from the HIV cost and services utilization study. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 11:75–82. doi: 10.1002/mpr.125 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kessler RC, Merikangas KR, Berglund P, Eaton WW, Koretz DS, Walters EE (2003) Mild disorders should not be eliminated from the DSM-V. Arch Gen Psychiatry 60:1117–1122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Preisig M, Merikangas KR, Angst J (2001) Clinical significance and comorbidity of subthreshold depression and anxiety in the community. Acta Psychiatr Scand 104:96–103. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0447.2001.00284.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew Sunderland
    • 1
  • Gavin Andrews
    • 1
  • Tim Slade
    • 2
  • Lorna Peters
    • 3
  1. 1.Clinical Research Unit for Anxiety and DepressionUniversity of New South Wales at St. Vincent’s Hospital, Level 4, O’Brien CentreDarlinghurstAustralia
  2. 2.National Drug and Alcohol Research CentreUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  3. 3.Centre for Emotional Health, Department of PsychologyMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations