Agreement between face-to-face and telephone-administered versions of the depression section of the NIMH diagnostic interview schedule☆
References (29)
- et al.
Telephone surveys in public health research
Med. Care.
(1986) - et al.
Tests for the comparability of a casual model of depression under two conditions of interviewing
J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.
(1985) - et al.
Measuring depression in the community: a comparison of telephone and personal interviews
Pub. Opinion Q.
(1982) - et al.
Telephone versus in-person surveys of community health status
Am. J. Pub. Hlth
(1982) - et al.
Comparison of the lay diagnostic interview schedule and a standardized psychiatric diagnosis: experience in eastern Baltimore
Archs gen. Psychiat.
(1985) Personal versus telephone interviews: effect on responses
Pub. Hlth Rep.
(1969)- et al.
A diagnostic interview—the schedule for affective disorders and schizophrenia
Archs gen. Psychiat.
(1978) Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
- et al.
Psychiatric diagnosis: what role for the computer?
Hosp. Com. Psychiat.
(1984)et al.Psychiatric diagnosis: what role for the computer?
Hosp. Com. Psychiat.
(1984)
A comparison of clinical and diagnostic interview schedule diagnoses—physician reexamination of lay-interviewed cases in the general population
Archs gen. Psychiat.
Personal versus telephone interviews: the effects of telephone reinterviews on reporting of psychiatric symptomatology
A critical comparison of the strategies of collecting data from households
J. Am. Statist. Ass.
Cited by (216)
Procedural validity of the AUDADIS-5 depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder modules: Substance abusers and others in the general population
2015, Drug and Alcohol DependenceCitation Excerpt :Centralized PRISM-5 telephone administration facilitated efficient, cost-effective, closely-supervised interviews, but left unanswered whether concordance would be higher if administration mode were constant in the two interviews. Nevertheless, telephone vs. in-person modes appear not to influence findings (Aziz and Kenford, 2004; Kessler et al., 2009; Sobin et al., 1993; Wells et al., 1988), so discordance was likely due to other factors. Finally, other participant characteristics may impact validity, warranting future investigation.
The Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-5 (AUDADIS-5): Procedural validity of substance use disorders modules through clinical re-appraisal in a general population sample
2015, Drug and Alcohol DependenceCitation Excerpt :The present study leaves unanswered whether concordance would be higher if administration mode had been constant in the two interviews. Nevertheless, telephone vs. in-person mode of administration has been shown repeatedly not to influence findings, including for alcohol harms (Midanik and Greenfield, 2003), substance use disorders (Kessler et al., 2009; Sobin et al., 1993), and other symptomatology (Aziz and Kenford, 2004; Wells et al., 1988). As such, the literature suggests that discordant cases were likely due to other factors.
Parenting and the parent-child relationship in families of children with mild to borderline intellectual disabilities and externalizing behavior
2015, Research in Developmental DisabilitiesPsychopathology in bariatric surgery candidates: A review of studies using structured diagnostic interviews
2014, Comprehensive PsychiatryIs the Children's Depression Inventory Short version a valid screening tool in pediatric care? A comparison to its full-length version
2012, Journal of Psychosomatic Research
- ☆
This research was supported by grants from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, The Pew Memorial Trust, and the National Institute of Mental Health. The conclusions are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Foundations of NIMH.