The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Criterion Validity of the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Version 2.3 (DISC-2.3)
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the criterion validity of the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC) Version 2.3 in the NIMH Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental Disorders (MECA) Study, using a design that permitted several comparisons of DISC-generated diagnoses with diagnoses based on clinician symptom ratings. METHOD: Two hundred forty-seven youths were selected from the 1,285 parent-youth pairs that constituted the four-site MECA sample. Subjects who screened positive for any of the five diagnostic areas under investigation in the validity study (attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, depressive disorder, and the major anxiety disorders) were recruited, as well as a comparable number of screen negatives. Clinicians reinterviewed separately both the youth and the primary caregiver using the DISC followed by a clinical-style interview, and then they rated the presence of symptoms and impairment. Computer algorithms combined this information into diagnoses using comparable rules for both DISC and clinical rating diagnoses. RESULTS: In general, the DISC showed moderate to good validity across a number of diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest some specific diagnostic areas in which further revision of the DISC is warranted. Three main sources of variability in DISC-clinician diagnostic agreement were evident over and above that due to the instrument itself, including (1) the informant used, (2) the algorithm applied in synthesizing symptom reports, and (3) the design of the validity comparison.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471445428 · Cited by 18,646
Robins, L. N. (1981) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1981.01780290015001 · Cited by 5,219
A Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS)
Shaffer, D. (1983) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1983.01790100074010 · Cited by 3,716
Self-citationAge differences in the reliability of the psychiatric interview of the child
Edelbrock, C., Costello, A. J., Dulcan, M. K., Kalas, R., & Conover, N. C. (1985) · Child Development · doi:10.2307/1130193 · Cited by 474
Self-citationStructured Interviews for Assessing Children
Hodges, K. (1993) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1993.tb00967.x · Cited by 152
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- Anthony, 1985, Comparison of the lay Diagnostic Interview Schedule and a standardized psychiatric diagnosis, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 42, 667, 10.1001/archpsyc.1985.01790300029004 · DOI · Paper page
- Boyle, 1993, Evaluation of the Diagnostic Interview for Children and Adolescents for use in general population samples, J Abnorm Child Psychol, 21, 663, 10.1007/BF00916449 · DOI
- Bravo, 1993, The Spanish translation and cultural adaptation of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC) in Puerto Rico, Cult Med Psychiatry, 17, 329, 10.1007/BF01380008 · DOI
- Cohen, 1960, A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales, Educ Psychol Meas, 20, 37, 10.1177/001316446002000104 · DOI · Paper page
- Cohen, 1987, Comparison of DISC and K-SADS-P interviews of an epidemiological sample of children, J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 26, 662, 10.1097/00004583-198709000-00009 · DOI
- Fallon, 1994, Determinants of reliability in psychiatric surveys of children ages 6 to 12, J Child Psychol Psychiatry, 35, 1391, 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1994.tb01282.x · DOI
- Fisher, 1993, Sensitivity of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children, 2nd edition (DISC 2.1) for specific diagnoses of children and adolescents, J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 32, 666, 10.1097/00004583-199305000-00026 · DOI
- Helzer, 1985, A comparison of clinical and diagnostic interview schedule diagnoses, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 42, 657, 10.1001/archpsyc.1985.01790300019003 · DOI · Paper page
- Jensen, 1995, Test-retest reliability of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC 2.1): parent, child and combined algorithms, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 52, 61, 10.1001/archpsyc.1995.03950130061007 · DOI
- Lahey, 1996, The NIMH Methods for the Epidemiology of Child and Adolescent Mental Disorders (MECA) Study: background and methodology, J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 35, 855, 10.1097/00004583-199607000-00011 · DOI
- Piacentini, 1993, The Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-Revised Version (DISC-R): III. Concurrent criterion validity, J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 32, 658, 10.1097/00004583-199305000-00025 · DOI · Paper page
- Ribera, 1996, Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC-2.1) in Spanish: reliability in a Hispanic population, J Child Psychol Psychiatry, 37, 195, 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1996.tb01391.x · DOI
- Robins, 1985, Epidemiology: reflections on testing the validity of psychiatric interviews, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 42, 918, 10.1001/archpsyc.1985.01790320090013 · DOI · Paper page
- Schwab-Stone, 1994, Reliability of diagnostic reporting for children aged 6–11 years: a test-retest study of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-Revised, Am J Psychiatry, 151, 1048, 10.1176/ajp.151.7.1048 · DOI
- Shaffer, 1996, The NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Version 2.3 (DISC-2.3): description, acceptability, prevalence rates, and performance in the MECA study, J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 35, 865, 10.1097/00004583-199607000-00012 · DOI · Paper page
- Shaffer, 1993, The Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-Revised Version (DISC-R): I. Preparation, field testing, interrater reliability, and acceptability, J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 32, 643, 10.1097/00004583-199305000-00023 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
KAUFMAN, J., BIRMAHER, B., BRENT, D., RAO, U., FLYNN, C., MORECI, P., WILLIAMSON, D., & RYAN, N. (1997) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-199707000-00021 · Cited by 10,148
SHAFFER, D., FISHER, P., LUCAS, C. P., DULCAN, M. K., & SCHWAB-STONE, M. E. (2000) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-200001000-00014 · Cited by 3,505
Self-citationPine, D. S., Cohen, P., Gurley, D., Brook, J., & Ma, Y. (1998) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.55.1.56 · Cited by 1,753
Goodman, R., Ford, T., Richards, H., Gatward, R., & Meltzer, H. (2000) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2000.tb02345.x · Cited by 1,755
Non-suicidal self-injury among adolescents: Diagnostic correlates and relation to suicide attempts
NOCK, M., JOINERJR, T., GORDON, K., LLOYDRICHARDSON, E., & PRINSTEIN, M. (2006) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2006.05.010 · Cited by 1,617
Metadata
- Authors
- SCHWAB-STONE, M. E., SHAFFER, D., DULCAN, M. K., JENSEN, P. S., FISHER, P., BIRD, H. R., GOODMAN, S. H., LAHEY, B. B., LICHTMAN, J. H., CANINO, G., RUBIO-STIPEC, M., & RAE, D. S.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1996-07
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 878-888
- ISSN
- 0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2020441554
- Cited by
- 390
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 25.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- Licence
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (vor, 4935 d)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Criterion Validity of the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Version 2.3 (DISC-2.3). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00004583-199607000-00013
- The paper
- SCHWAB-STONE, M. E., SHAFFER, D., DULCAN, M. K., JENSEN, P. S., FISHER, P., BIRD, H. R., GOODMAN, S. H., LAHEY, B. B., LICHTMAN, J. H., CANINO, G., RUBIO-STIPEC, M., & RAE, D. S. (1996). Criterion Validity of the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Version 2.3 (DISC-2.3). Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199607000-00013
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
