The Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-5 (AUDADIS-5): Procedural validity of substance use disorders modules through clinical re-appraisal in a general population sample
The Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-5 (AUDADIS-5): Procedural validity of substance use disorders modules through clinical re-appraisal in a general population sample
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.12.011
复制
发表时间：
2015-03-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Grant, Bridget F.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hasin, Deborah S.;Greenstein, Eliana;Grant, Bridget F.
背景：本研究的目的是通过临床医生重新评估重新访谈来评估非专业人士管理的酒精使用障碍和相关残疾访谈时间表、精神障碍诊断和统计手册第五版 (DSM-5) 版 (AUDADIS-5) 的物质障碍模块的程序有效性。方法：该研究对来自全国酒精及相关流行病学调查的 712 名受访者采用了重测设计。条件-III (NESARC-III)。使用临床医生进行的半结构化访谈、物质和精神障碍精神病学研究访谈、DSM-5 版本 (PRISM-5) 作为重新评估。 Kappa 系数表明 AUDADIS-5 和 PRISM-5 对于 DSM-5 物质使用障碍诊断的一致性，而组内相关系数 (ICC) 表明维度尺度上的一致性，表明每种疾病的 DSM-5 标准计数。结果：除了少数例外，AUDADIS-5 和 PRISM-5 对于 DSM-5 物质使用障碍诊断的一致性范围从一般到良好（k = 0.40-0.72）。对于大多数 DSM-5 SUD 诊断，维度量表的一致性非常好（ICC >= 0.75），对于其余大多数诊断，维度量表的一致性非常好（ICC = 0.43-0.72）。结论：正如半结构化临床医生重新评估的一致性所示，本研究中发现的 AUDADIS-5 DSM-5 物质使用障碍诊断的程序有效性表明，这些AUDADIS-5 诊断是流行病学研究的有用工具。 AUDADIS-5 和 PRISM-5 维度 DSM-5 SUD 测量的一致性相当强，支持当前更加重视精神病理学维度测量的运动，并表明此类测量可能比二元诊断为研究提供更多信息，也可能用于临床目的。 (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 保留所有权利。
Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the procedural validity of the substance disorder modules of the lay-administered Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) Version (AUDADIS-5) through clinician re-appraisal re-interviews.Methods: The study employed a test-retest design among 712 respondents from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III). A clinician-administered, semi-structured interview, the Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders, DSM-5 version (PRISM-5) was used as the re-appraisal. Kappa coeffients indicated concordance of the AUDADIS-5 and PRISM-5 for DSM-5 substance use disorder diagnoses, while intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) indicated concordance on dimensional scales indicating the DSM-5 criteria count for each disorder.Results: With few exceptions, concordance of the AUDADIS-5 and the PRISM-5 for DSM-5 diagnoses of substance use disorders ranged from fair to good (k = 0.40-0.72). Concordance on dimensional scales was excellent (ICC >= 0.75) for the majority of DSM-5 SUD diagnoses, and fair to good (ICC = 0.43-0.72) for most of the rest.Conclusions: As indicated by concordance with a semi-structured clinician-administered re-appraisal, the procedural validity of the AUDADIS-5 DSM-5 substance use disorder diagnoses found in this study indicates that these AUDADIS-5 diagnoses are useful tools in epidemiologic studies. The considerably stronger concordance of the AUDADIS-5 and PRISM-5 dimensional DSM-5 SUD measures supports a current movement to place more emphasis on dimensional measures of psychopathology, and suggests that such measures may be more informative than binary diagnoses for research, and possibly for clinical purposes as well. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.