CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 326Impact of Technology on AdolescentsGambling Behavior and TreatmentsSexuality, Behavior, and Technology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of the diagnostic criteria of Internet gaming disorder in the DSM-5 among young adults in Taiwan

Ko, Chih-Hung, Yen, Ju-Yu, Chen, Sue-Huei, Wang, Peng-Wei, Chen, Cheng-Sheng, Yen, Cheng-Fang·2014·Journal of Psychiatric Research
DOI 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.02.008
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The DSM-5 proposed the diagnostic criteria of Internet gaming disorder (IGD) and suggested that more evidence is necessary before it is included as a standard disorder in the DSM system. The aims of this study were to: 1) evaluate the diagnostic validity of individual criteria of IGD in the DSM-5 and the criteria of craving and irritability; 2) determine the optimal cut-off point for the IGD criteria in the DSM-5. We recruited 75 subjects with IGD, 75 without IGD, and 75 in remission from IGD based on the Diagnostic Criteria of Internet Addiction for College Students (DC-IA-C). All participants underwent a diagnostic interview based on the diagnostic criteria of IGD in the DSM-5 and completed the CIAS and QGU-B. Except for the "deceiving" and "escape" criteria, all criteria of IGD had diagnostic accuracy ranging from 77.3% to 94.7% to differentiate university students with IGD from remitted students. The criterion of craving had diagnostic accuracy of 88% and the criteria of irritability had an accuracy of 68.7%. Fulfilling 5 or more criteria of IGD in the DSM-5 was the best cut-off point to differentiate young adults with IGD from healthy or remitted users.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.02.008

Cites

48 of 48 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 50 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 326

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Ko, C.-H., Yen, J.-Y., Chen, S.-H., Wang, P.-W., Chen, C.-S., & Yen, C.-F.
Affiliations
  • Kaohsiung Medical University (TW)
  • National Taiwan University (TW)
Corresponding author
Yen, Cheng-Fang
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-06
Volume
53
Pages
103-110
ISSN
0022-3956 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.02.008
OpenAlex
W2147164166
Cited by
326
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 12
FWCI
97.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2014-10-01)
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Council in Taiwan (102-2314-B-037-005)
  • Kaohsiung Municipal Hsiao-Kang Hospital (KMHK-101-009)
  • Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital (KMUH-99-9R50)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Keywords
internet gaming disorder, DSM-5 diagnostic criteria, diagnostic validity, craving, irritability, cut-off values, young adults, university students, remission, internet addiction
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, ROC Curve, Taiwan, Case-Control Studies, Behavior, Addictive, Internet, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Young Adult

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