MedElevator
Войти в исследования European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2016
The validity and reliability of the diagnosis of hyperkinetic disorders in the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Registry.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mohr-Jensen C, Vinkel Koch S, Briciet Lauritsen M, Steinhausen H-C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To validate the diagnosis of hyperkinetic disorders (HD) in the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Registry (DPCRR) for children and adolescents aged 4 to 15 given in the years 1995 to 2005.
METHOD: From a total of 4568 participants, a representative random subsample of n=387 patients were used to validate the diagnosis. Patient files were systematically scored for the presence of ICD-10 criteria for HD and oppositional defiant disorder/conduct disorder (ODD/CD; F91). Further to this, an inter-rater reliability study was also conducted, whereby two experienced child and adolescent psychiatrists who were blind to patients discharge diagnoses, rated a random subsample of n=101 participants.
RESULTS: Information was available for 372 out of 387 patients. Out of n=372 available files, n=324 (86.8%) were evaluated to fulfil diagnostic criteria for HD. Due to missing information it was not possible to reach a conclusion for 5.1% of the cases, 3.8% of the diagnoses were registration errors, and in 4.3% of the files the diagnosis had to be rejected. Inter-rater agreement was high (κ=0.83, z=10.9, P<.001). The validity of hyperkinetic disorders, unspecified (F90.9) was lower and comorbid CD/ODD were under-diagnosed in the sample. All participants fulfilling HD criteria also fulfilled DSM-5-criteria for ADHD.
CONCLUSION: The risk of misclassification of patients with HD in the DPCRR is relatively low, with the exception of the diagnosis of hyperkinetic disorders, unspecified (F90.9).
METHOD: From a total of 4568 participants, a representative random subsample of n=387 patients were used to validate the diagnosis. Patient files were systematically scored for the presence of ICD-10 criteria for HD and oppositional defiant disorder/conduct disorder (ODD/CD; F91). Further to this, an inter-rater reliability study was also conducted, whereby two experienced child and adolescent psychiatrists who were blind to patients discharge diagnoses, rated a random subsample of n=101 participants.
RESULTS: Information was available for 372 out of 387 patients. Out of n=372 available files, n=324 (86.8%) were evaluated to fulfil diagnostic criteria for HD. Due to missing information it was not possible to reach a conclusion for 5.1% of the cases, 3.8% of the diagnoses were registration errors, and in 4.3% of the files the diagnosis had to be rejected. Inter-rater agreement was high (κ=0.83, z=10.9, P<.001). The validity of hyperkinetic disorders, unspecified (F90.9) was lower and comorbid CD/ODD were under-diagnosed in the sample. All participants fulfilling HD criteria also fulfilled DSM-5-criteria for ADHD.
CONCLUSION: The risk of misclassification of patients with HD in the DPCRR is relatively low, with the exception of the diagnosis of hyperkinetic disorders, unspecified (F90.9).