Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T04:03:10.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Reliability of Psychiatric Diagnosis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

N. Kreitman
N. Kreitman*
Affiliation:
Medical Research Council Clinical Psychiatry Research Unit, Graylingwell Hospital, Chichester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

No observation can be incorporated satisfactorily in a body of knowledge unless its reliability, however defined, is also known. In psychiatry, the concept of reliability has in great measure been transplanted from clinical psychology, but its optimal application to meet psychiatric needs requires some attention.

For the purposes of psychiatry, reliability can conveniently be measured as the amount of agreement between different observers examining the same subjects (or a comparable series of subjects). The results may be expressed as the percentage of subjects in which agreement on the relevant variables is reached, or, in the case of two or more closely matched series being employed, by comparing the reported incidence of the phenomena under study. In one or other form this simple principle has been applied in a number of reliability studies, of which the majority have been concerned with the vital question of the reliability of nosological diagnosis (Ash, 1949; Mehlman, 1952; Hunt, Wittson and Hunt, 1953; Seeman, 1953; Foulds, 1955; Schmidt and Fonda, 1956; Pasamanick, Dinitz and Lefton, 1959), while Reid and Finnesinger (1952) have contributed an interesting semantic analysis of the concepts involved.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 107 , Issue 450 , September 1961 , pp. 876 - 886
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1961 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ash, P., “The Reliability of Psychiatric Diagnoses”, J. Ab. Soc. Psychol., 1949, 44, 272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boisen, A., “Types of Dementia Praecox”, Psychiat., 1938, 1, 233.Google Scholar
Cartwright, D., and French, J. R. P. Jr., “The Reliability of Life-History Studies”, Charac. and Personal., 1939, 8, 110.Google Scholar
Cavenny, E. L., Wittson, C., Hunt, W. A., and Herman, R. F., “Psychiatric Diagnosis, its Nature and Function”, J. Nerv. Ment. Dis., 1955, 121, 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chassan, J. B., “On the Unreliability of Reliability”, Psychiatry, 1957, 20, 163.Google Scholar
Doering, C. R., and Raymond, A., “Reliability of Observation in Psychiatric and Related Characteristics”, Amer. J. Orthopsychiat., 1934, 4, 249.Google Scholar
Foulds, G. A., “Reliability of Psychiatric and Validity of Psychological Diagnoses”, J. Ment. Sci., 1955, 101, 851.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldfarb, A., “Reliability of Diagnostic Judgements made by Psychologists”, J. Clin. Psychol., 1959, 15, 392.Google Scholar
Hunt, W. A., “An Actuarial Approach to Clinical Judgement”, in: Bass, and Berg, , Objective Approaches to Personality Assessment, 1959. Princeton.Google Scholar
Idem , Arnhoff, F. N., and Cotton, J. W., “Reliability, Chance and Fantasy in Inter-Judge Agreement among Clinicians”, J. Clin. Psychol., 1954, 10, 294.Google Scholar
Idem , Wittson, C., and Hunt, E., “A Theoretical and Practical Analysis of the Diagnostic Process” in: Hoch, and Zubin, , Current Problems in Psychiatric Diagnosis, 1951. New York: Proc. A.M.A., 1953.Google Scholar
Idem , Wittson, C. L., and Hunt, E. B., “Relationship between Definiteness of Psychiatric Diagnosis and Severity of Disability”, J. Clin. Psychol., 1952, 8, 314.Google Scholar
Iidem , “Relationship between Amount of Presenting Symptomatology and Severity of Disability”, ibid., 1955, 11, 306.Google Scholar
Hamburg, D., et al., “Classification and Rating of Emotional Experiences”, Arch. Neurol. Psychiat., 1958, 79, 415.Google Scholar
Kreitman, N., “Clinical Orientation”, 1959. M.D. Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Masserman, J., and Carmichael, H., “Diagnosis and Prognosis in Psychiatry”, J. Ment. Sci., 1938, 84, 59.Google Scholar
Mehlman, B., “The Reliability of Psychiatric Diagnoses”, J. As. Soc. Psychol., 1952, 47, 577.Google Scholar
Norris, V., Mental Illness in London, Maudsley Monograph No. 6, 1959. London: Chapman & Hall Ltd.Google Scholar
Pasamanick, B., Dinitz, S., and Lefton, L., “Psychiatric Orientation in Relation to Diagnosis and Treatment”, Amer. J. Psychiat., 1959, 116, 127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reid, D., “Epidemiological Methods in the Study of Mental Disorders”, Public Health Papers No. 2, W.H.O., 1960. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Reid, J., and Finnesinger, J., “The Role of Definition in Psychiatry”, Amer. J. Psychiat., 1952, 109, 413.Google Scholar
Raines, G., and Rohrer, J. H., “The Operational Matrix of Psychiatric Research”, ibid., 1955, 111, (10), 721.Google Scholar
Schmidt, H. O., and Fonda, C. P., “The Reliability of Psychiatric Diagnosis: A New Look”, J. As. Soc. Psychol., 1956, 52 ii, 262.Google ScholarPubMed
Seeman, W., “Psychiatric Diagnosis”, J. Nerv. Ment. Dis., 1953, 118, (6), 541.Google Scholar
Stengel, E., “A Comparative Study of Psychiatric Classification”, Proc. Roy. Soc., 1960, 53, 123.Google Scholar
Idem , Bull. Wld. Hlth. Org., 1960, 21, 601.Google Scholar
W.H.O., Epidemiology of Mental Disorders, Technical Report Series No. 185, 1960. Geneva.Google Scholar
Wittson, C., and Hunt, W., “The Predictive Value of the Brief Psychiatric Interview”, Amer. J. Psychiat., 1951, 107, 582.Google Scholar
Wittson, C. L., Hunt, W., and Stevenson, I., “A Follow-Up Study of Neuropsychiatric Screening”, J. As. Soc. Psychol., 1946, 41, 79.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.