TY - JOUR
T1 - Magnitude of rater differences in assessment scales for schizophrenia
AU - Suzuki, Takefumi
AU - Takeuchi, Hiroyoshi
AU - Nakajima, Shinichiro
AU - Nomura, Kensuke
AU - Uchida, Hiroyuki
AU - Yagi, Gohei
AU - Watanabe, Koichiro
AU - Kashima, Haruo
PY - 2010/10/1
Y1 - 2010/10/1
N2 - The magnitude of rater differences, instead of interrater reliability, in the assessment scales of schizophrenia has rarely been investigated and was therefore addressed in this study.Thirty-six patients with schizophrenia were independently assessed by 4 expert physicians, using clinical rating scales including the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The scores obtained by the physician in charge (PIC), who had a long close contact with the patients, served as the referent answer for the purpose of this study. The scores rated by the other 3 non-PIC psychiatrists, who had a first formal examination with them, were evaluated for percentage deviance from the referent answer.The results showed that the PIC raters endorsed the numerically highest score in 20 (56%) of the 36 patients, whereas they rated the lowest in only 2 (6%) in the PANSS total score. The non-PIC assessors on the average underrated the PANSS total score by 10%, and such a tendency of underestimating the severity was noted across other clinical scales. Furthermore, the PANSS total score by one of the non-PIC physicians was deviant from the referent answer by at least 20% in 15 (42%) of 36 instances. Importantly, this magnitude of deviance was noted in the context of an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92.This unique investigation disclosed clinically pertinent differences among raters, even under an excellent interrater reliability. The magnitude of differences described herein seems to be an underestimation, and the baseline scores by the independent new raters might need to be corrected for those by the PICs.
AB - The magnitude of rater differences, instead of interrater reliability, in the assessment scales of schizophrenia has rarely been investigated and was therefore addressed in this study.Thirty-six patients with schizophrenia were independently assessed by 4 expert physicians, using clinical rating scales including the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The scores obtained by the physician in charge (PIC), who had a long close contact with the patients, served as the referent answer for the purpose of this study. The scores rated by the other 3 non-PIC psychiatrists, who had a first formal examination with them, were evaluated for percentage deviance from the referent answer.The results showed that the PIC raters endorsed the numerically highest score in 20 (56%) of the 36 patients, whereas they rated the lowest in only 2 (6%) in the PANSS total score. The non-PIC assessors on the average underrated the PANSS total score by 10%, and such a tendency of underestimating the severity was noted across other clinical scales. Furthermore, the PANSS total score by one of the non-PIC physicians was deviant from the referent answer by at least 20% in 15 (42%) of 36 instances. Importantly, this magnitude of deviance was noted in the context of an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92.This unique investigation disclosed clinically pertinent differences among raters, even under an excellent interrater reliability. The magnitude of differences described herein seems to be an underestimation, and the baseline scores by the independent new raters might need to be corrected for those by the PICs.
KW - PANSS
KW - assessment
KW - interrater reliability
KW - rater differences
KW - schizophrenia
KW - validity
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957273380&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957273380&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/JCP.0b013e3181f0bae1
DO - 10.1097/JCP.0b013e3181f0bae1
M3 - Article
C2 - 20814326
AN - SCOPUS:77957273380
SN - 0271-0749
VL - 30
SP - 607
EP - 611
JO - Journal of clinical psychopharmacology
JF - Journal of clinical psychopharmacology
IS - 5
ER -