This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Joseph M. Rey, PhD, MRANZCP; Jon M. Plapp, PhD; Gavin W. Stewart, BSc; Ian Richards, FRANZCP; Marie Bashir, FRANZCP
Rivendell Adolescent Unit Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Hospital Road Concord West, NSW, 2137, Australia

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1987;44(1):96.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

In reviewing the multiaxial system of DSM-III in the February 1985 issue of the ARCHIVES, Williams¹ stated that in the DSM-III field trials² "the reliability of the judgment of severity of psychosocial stressors was at least fair." That assessment was based on a k coefficient of 0.62 for cases evaluated in joint interviews and 0.58 for test-retest evaluations. However, although the review quotes some of the criticisms of DSM-III made by Rutter and Shaffer,³ it does not repeat their conclusion about the methodology of the field trials: "there must be considerable reservations about the meaning of reliability figures obtained under such inadequate conditions."

The bulk of the DSM-III field trial reliability data² are based on evaluations made by two colleagues (each clinician chose his or her own partner in the study) from the same institution (and probably with the same biases) for . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?