Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Test-retest reliability of DSM-5 substance disorder measures as assessed with the PRISM-5, a clinician-administered diagnostic interview.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2020 11 01; 216:108294.DA

Abstract

AIM

In DSM-5, the definitions of substance use disorders (SUD) were changed considerably, yet little is known about the reliability of DSM-5 SUD and its new features.

METHODS

The test-retest reliability of DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV substance dependence (SD) was evaluated in 565 adult substance users, each interviewed twice by different clinician interviewers using the semi-structured Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders, DSM-5 version (PRISM-5). DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV SD criteria were assessed for past year and lifetime, yielding diagnoses and severity levels for alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, cocaine, heroin, opioids, sedatives, hallucinogen, and stimulant use disorders. Cohen's and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) assessed reliability for categorical and graded outcomes, respectively. Factors potentially influencing reliability were explored, including inpatient vs. community participant, days between interviews gender, age, race/ethnicity, and SUD severity.

RESULTS

DSM-5 SUD diagnoses had substantial to excellent reliability for most substances (κ = 0.63-0.94), and moderate for others (hallucinogens, stimulants, sedatives; κ = 0.50-0.59). For graded outcomes (DSM-5 SUD mild, moderate, severe; criteria count 0-11), reliability was substantial to excellent (ICC = 0.74-0.99). Comparisons of DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV SD reliability showed few significant differences. Reliability of the DSM-5 craving criterion was excellent for heroin (κ = 0.84-0.95) and moderate to substantial for other substances (κ = 0.49-0.76). The only factor influencing reliability of SUD was severity, with milder disorders significantly more likely to be discordant between the interviews.

CONCLUSION

Reproducibility is crucial to good measurement. In a large sample using rigorous methodology, diagnoses and dimensional measures from clinician-administered interviews for DSM-5 SUD were generally highly reliable.

Authors+Show Affiliations

New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY 10032, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY, 10032, USA; Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 722 W 168th St, New York, NY, 10032, USA. Electronic address: dsh2@cumc.columbia.edu.New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY 10032, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY, 10032, USA.New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY 10032, USA.New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY 10032, USA.New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY 10032, USA.New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY 10032, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY, 10032, USA.New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY 10032, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, 1051 Riverside Dr, New York, NY, 10032, USA.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

33007702

Citation

Hasin, Deborah, et al. "Test-retest Reliability of DSM-5 Substance Disorder Measures as Assessed With the PRISM-5, a Clinician-administered Diagnostic Interview." Drug and Alcohol Dependence, vol. 216, 2020, p. 108294.
Hasin D, Shmulewitz D, Stohl M, et al. Test-retest reliability of DSM-5 substance disorder measures as assessed with the PRISM-5, a clinician-administered diagnostic interview. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2020;216:108294.
Hasin, D., Shmulewitz, D., Stohl, M., Greenstein, E., Roncone, S., Aharonovich, E., & Wall, M. (2020). Test-retest reliability of DSM-5 substance disorder measures as assessed with the PRISM-5, a clinician-administered diagnostic interview. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 216, 108294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108294
Hasin D, et al. Test-retest Reliability of DSM-5 Substance Disorder Measures as Assessed With the PRISM-5, a Clinician-administered Diagnostic Interview. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2020 11 1;216:108294. PubMed PMID: 33007702.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Test-retest reliability of DSM-5 substance disorder measures as assessed with the PRISM-5, a clinician-administered diagnostic interview. AU - Hasin,Deborah, AU - Shmulewitz,Dvora, AU - Stohl,Malka, AU - Greenstein,Eliana, AU - Roncone,Stephanie, AU - Aharonovich,Efrat, AU - Wall,Melanie, Y1 - 2020/09/15/ PY - 2020/04/02/received PY - 2020/09/09/revised PY - 2020/09/10/accepted PY - 2020/10/3/pubmed PY - 2021/4/14/medline PY - 2020/10/2/entrez KW - DSM-5 KW - Dependence KW - Reliability KW - Substance use disorders KW - Test-restest SP - 108294 EP - 108294 JF - Drug and alcohol dependence JO - Drug Alcohol Depend VL - 216 N2 - AIM: In DSM-5, the definitions of substance use disorders (SUD) were changed considerably, yet little is known about the reliability of DSM-5 SUD and its new features. METHODS: The test-retest reliability of DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV substance dependence (SD) was evaluated in 565 adult substance users, each interviewed twice by different clinician interviewers using the semi-structured Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders, DSM-5 version (PRISM-5). DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV SD criteria were assessed for past year and lifetime, yielding diagnoses and severity levels for alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, cocaine, heroin, opioids, sedatives, hallucinogen, and stimulant use disorders. Cohen's and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) assessed reliability for categorical and graded outcomes, respectively. Factors potentially influencing reliability were explored, including inpatient vs. community participant, days between interviews gender, age, race/ethnicity, and SUD severity. RESULTS: DSM-5 SUD diagnoses had substantial to excellent reliability for most substances (κ = 0.63-0.94), and moderate for others (hallucinogens, stimulants, sedatives; κ = 0.50-0.59). For graded outcomes (DSM-5 SUD mild, moderate, severe; criteria count 0-11), reliability was substantial to excellent (ICC = 0.74-0.99). Comparisons of DSM-5 SUD and DSM-IV SD reliability showed few significant differences. Reliability of the DSM-5 craving criterion was excellent for heroin (κ = 0.84-0.95) and moderate to substantial for other substances (κ = 0.49-0.76). The only factor influencing reliability of SUD was severity, with milder disorders significantly more likely to be discordant between the interviews. CONCLUSION: Reproducibility is crucial to good measurement. In a large sample using rigorous methodology, diagnoses and dimensional measures from clinician-administered interviews for DSM-5 SUD were generally highly reliable. SN - 1879-0046 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/33007702/Test_retest_reliability_of_DSM_5_substance_disorder_measures_as_assessed_with_the_PRISM_5_a_clinician_administered_diagnostic_interview_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -