 |
|
Quantification of Agreement in Psychiatric Diagnosis Revisited
Patrick E. Shrout, PhD;
Robert L. Spitzer, MD;
Joseph L. Fleiss, PhD
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1987;44(2):172-177.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings. |
|
|
|
Eighteen years ago in this journal, Spitzer and colleagues1 published "Quantification of Agreement in Psychiatric Diagnosis," in which they argued that a new measure, Cohen's k statistic,2 was the appropriate index of diagnostic agreement in psychiatry. They pointed out that other measures of diagnostic reliability then in use, such as the total percent agreement and the contingency coefficient, were flawed as indexes of agreement since they either overestimated the discriminating power of the diagnosticians or were affected by associations among the diagnoses other than strict agreement. The new statistic seemed to overcome the weaknesses of the other measures. It took into account the fact that raters agree by chance alone some of the time, and it only gave a perfect value if there was total agreement among the raters. Furthermore, generalizations of the simple k statistic were already available. This family of statistics could be used to assess
. . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]
Author Affiliations
From the New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York (Drs Shrout, Spitzer, and Fleiss); and the Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health (Drs Shrout and Fleiss), and the Department of Psychiatry (Dr Spitzer), Columbia University, New York.
Footnotes
Accepted for publication Jan 31, 1986.
Reprint requests to Division of Biostatistics, Columbia University School of Public Health, 600 W 168th St, New York, NY 10032 (Dr Shrout).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
|
