Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2014 Apr;23(4):197-205. doi: 10.1007/s00787-013-0442-6. Epub 2013 Jul 4.

Influence of assessment instrument on ADHD diagnosis.

Author information

1
Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Haukeland University Hospital, 5021, Bergen, Norway. maj-britt.posserud@uni.no.
2
Regional Centre for Child and Youth Mental Health and Child Well-Fare, Uni Health, Uni Research, Bergen, Norway. maj-britt.posserud@uni.no.
3
Department of Biological and Medical Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. maj-britt.posserud@uni.no.
4
K. G. Jebsen Center for Research on Neuropsychiatric Disorders, Bergen, Norway. maj-britt.posserud@uni.no.
5
Regional Centre for Child and Youth Mental Health and Child Well-Fare, Uni Health, Uni Research, Bergen, Norway.
6
Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health Capital Region, Institute for Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
7
Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
8
Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
9
Gillberg Neuropsychiatry Centre, Department of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
10
Department of Biological and Medical Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
11
K. G. Jebsen Center for Research on Neuropsychiatric Disorders, Bergen, Norway.

Abstract

We compared four instruments commonly used to screen for and diagnose Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children. The Bergen Child Study included a DSM-IV ADHD symptom list and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) as screen in Phase one. Phase two included the parent Development and Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA), whereas Phase three comprised in-depth clinical assessment, including the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School Aged Children (K-SADS). We compared ADHD as diagnosed by the four instruments in the children with normal intellectual functioning participating in all three phases (N = 234). The DSM-IV ADHD symptom list showed moderate agreement with all other instruments (κ = 0.53-0.57), whereas there was fair agreement between the K-SADS-DAWBA (κ = 0.31) and between SDQ-DAWBA (κ = 0.33). The DAWBA diagnosed fewer children with ADHD than did the other instruments. Implications for use of the instruments are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

ADHD; Agreement; Assessment; DAWBA; Epidemiology; K-SADS; SDQ

PMID:
23824470
DOI:
10.1007/s00787-013-0442-6
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center