CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 500Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesReliability and Agreement in MeasurementChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reliability of DSM-III-R Anxiety Disorder Categories: Using the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule—Revised (ADIS-R)

Di Nardo, Peter A.·1993·Archives of General Psychiatry
DOI 10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820160009001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A large reliability study of DSM-III-R anxiety disorders is reported in which outpatients (n = 267) received two independent structured interviews (Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule-Revised). It is the only reliability study to date in which the final DSM-III-R criteria are used throughout the study. Reliability was assessed for each diagnosis when it was assigned as a principal diagnosis and when it was assigned as either a principal or an additional diagnosis. Excellent reliability was obtained for current principal diagnoses of simple phobia, social phobia, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Agreement was good for panic disorder when all severity levels of agoraphobic avoidance were combined. Reliability was fair for generalized anxiety disorder. Remaining diagnostic difficulties, particularly in identifying levels of agoraphobic avoidance and in reliably diagnosing generalized anxiety disorder, are discussed in the context of changes in diagnostic criteria that are under consideration for DSM-IV.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820160009001

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 17 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 500

Related

Metadata

Authors
Di Nardo, P. A.
Venue
Archives of General Psychiatry
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
1993-04-01
Volume
50
Issue
4
Pages
251
ISSN
0003-990X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820160009001
OpenAlex
W1497985020
Cited by
498
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 19
FWCI
36.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of General Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Public Health Service (R01M-39096)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
DSM-III-R, anxiety disorders, diagnostic reliability, interobserver agreement, specific phobia, social anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobic avoidance, generalized anxiety disorder, diagnostic criteria, DSM-IV
MeSH terms
Adult, Agoraphobia, Ambulatory Care, Anxiety Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Terminology as Topic, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Phobic Disorders, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Severity of Illness Index, Reproducibility of Results, Panic Disorder

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review