Inter-Rater Reliability between Structured and Non-Structured Interviews Is Fair in Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorders—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Public Deposited
Analytics

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Request Version for Screen Reader
Creator
  • Neto, Hélio Rocha
    • Other Affiliation: Lisbon University
  • Moreira, Ana Lúcia R.
    • Other Affiliation: Cork Kerry Community Healthcare
  • Hosken, Lucas
    • Other Affiliation: University Hospital Clementino Fraga Filho
  • Langfus, Joshua A.
    • Affiliation: College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Psychology and Neuroscience
  • Cavalcanti, Maria Tavares
    • Other Affiliation: Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
  • Youngstrom, Eric Arden
    • Affiliation: College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Psychology and Neuroscience
  • Telles-Correia, Diogo
    • Other Affiliation: Lisbon University
Abstract
  • We aimed to find agreement between diagnoses obtained through standardized (SDI) and non-standardized diagnostic interviews (NSDI) for schizophrenia and Bipolar Affective Disorder (BD). Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted. Publications from 2007 to 2020 comparing SDI and NSDI diagnoses in adults without neurological disorders were screened in MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, and SCOPUS, following PROSPERO registration CRD42020187157, PRISMA guidelines, and quality assessment using QUADAS–2. Results: From 54231 entries, 22 studies were analyzed, and 13 were included in the final meta-analysis of kappa agreement using a mixed-effects meta-regression model. A mean kappa of 0.41 (Fair agreement, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.47) but high heterogeneity (Î2 = 92%) were calculated. Gender, mean age, NSDI setting (Inpatient vs. Outpatient; University vs. Non-university), and SDI informant (Self vs. Professional) were tested as predictors in meta-regression. Only SDI informant was relevant for the explanatory model, leaving 79% unexplained heterogeneity. Egger’s test did not indicate significant bias, and QUADAS–2 resulted in “average” data quality. Conclusions: Most studies using SDIs do not report the original sample size, only the SDI-diagnosed patients. Kappa comparison resulted in high heterogeneity, which may reflect the influence of non-systematic bias in diagnostic processes. Although results were highly heterogeneous, we measured a fair agreement kappa between SDI and NSDI, implying clinicians might operate in scenarios not equivalent to psychiatry trials, where samples are filtered, and there may be more emphasis on maintaining reliability. The present study received no funding.
Date of publication
Keyword
DOI
Identifier
Resource type
  • Article
License
  • Attribution 4.0 International
Journal title
  • Diagnostics
Journal volume
  • 13
Journal issue
  • 3
Page start
  • 526
Language
  • English
Version
  • Publisher
ISSN
  • 2075-4418
Publisher
  • MDPI

Relations

Parents:

This work has no parents.

In Collection:

Items

Thumbnail Title Date Uploaded Visibility Actions
file details diagnostics-13-00526-v2.pdf 2023-02-02 Public Download