Magnitude of rater differences in assessment scales for schizophrenia

Takefumi Suzuki, Hiroyoshi Takeuchi, Shinichiro Nakajima, Kensuke Nomura, Hiroyuki Uchida, Gohei Yagi, Koichiro Watanabe, Haruo Kashima

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The magnitude of rater differences, instead of interrater reliability, in the assessment scales of schizophrenia has rarely been investigated and was therefore addressed in this study.Thirty-six patients with schizophrenia were independently assessed by 4 expert physicians, using clinical rating scales including the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The scores obtained by the physician in charge (PIC), who had a long close contact with the patients, served as the referent answer for the purpose of this study. The scores rated by the other 3 non-PIC psychiatrists, who had a first formal examination with them, were evaluated for percentage deviance from the referent answer.The results showed that the PIC raters endorsed the numerically highest score in 20 (56%) of the 36 patients, whereas they rated the lowest in only 2 (6%) in the PANSS total score. The non-PIC assessors on the average underrated the PANSS total score by 10%, and such a tendency of underestimating the severity was noted across other clinical scales. Furthermore, the PANSS total score by one of the non-PIC physicians was deviant from the referent answer by at least 20% in 15 (42%) of 36 instances. Importantly, this magnitude of deviance was noted in the context of an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92.This unique investigation disclosed clinically pertinent differences among raters, even under an excellent interrater reliability. The magnitude of differences described herein seems to be an underestimation, and the baseline scores by the independent new raters might need to be corrected for those by the PICs.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)607-611
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Clinical Psychopharmacology
Volume30
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010 Oct

Fingerprint

Schizophrenia
Physicians
Psychiatry

Keywords

  • assessment
  • interrater reliability
  • PANSS
  • rater differences
  • schizophrenia
  • validity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

Magnitude of rater differences in assessment scales for schizophrenia. / Suzuki, Takefumi; Takeuchi, Hiroyoshi; Nakajima, Shinichiro; Nomura, Kensuke; Uchida, Hiroyuki; Yagi, Gohei; Watanabe, Koichiro; Kashima, Haruo.

In: Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, Vol. 30, No. 5, 10.2010, p. 607-611.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Suzuki, Takefumi ; Takeuchi, Hiroyoshi ; Nakajima, Shinichiro ; Nomura, Kensuke ; Uchida, Hiroyuki ; Yagi, Gohei ; Watanabe, Koichiro ; Kashima, Haruo. / Magnitude of rater differences in assessment scales for schizophrenia. In: Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology. 2010 ; Vol. 30, No. 5. pp. 607-611.
@article{b6331dda054f4f59b123fb7fd560c14e,
title = "Magnitude of rater differences in assessment scales for schizophrenia",
abstract = "The magnitude of rater differences, instead of interrater reliability, in the assessment scales of schizophrenia has rarely been investigated and was therefore addressed in this study.Thirty-six patients with schizophrenia were independently assessed by 4 expert physicians, using clinical rating scales including the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The scores obtained by the physician in charge (PIC), who had a long close contact with the patients, served as the referent answer for the purpose of this study. The scores rated by the other 3 non-PIC psychiatrists, who had a first formal examination with them, were evaluated for percentage deviance from the referent answer.The results showed that the PIC raters endorsed the numerically highest score in 20 (56{\%}) of the 36 patients, whereas they rated the lowest in only 2 (6{\%}) in the PANSS total score. The non-PIC assessors on the average underrated the PANSS total score by 10{\%}, and such a tendency of underestimating the severity was noted across other clinical scales. Furthermore, the PANSS total score by one of the non-PIC physicians was deviant from the referent answer by at least 20{\%} in 15 (42{\%}) of 36 instances. Importantly, this magnitude of deviance was noted in the context of an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92.This unique investigation disclosed clinically pertinent differences among raters, even under an excellent interrater reliability. The magnitude of differences described herein seems to be an underestimation, and the baseline scores by the independent new raters might need to be corrected for those by the PICs.",
keywords = "assessment, interrater reliability, PANSS, rater differences, schizophrenia, validity",
author = "Takefumi Suzuki and Hiroyoshi Takeuchi and Shinichiro Nakajima and Kensuke Nomura and Hiroyuki Uchida and Gohei Yagi and Koichiro Watanabe and Haruo Kashima",
year = "2010",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1097/JCP.0b013e3181f0bae1",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "607--611",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology",
issn = "0271-0749",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Magnitude of rater differences in assessment scales for schizophrenia

AU - Suzuki, Takefumi

AU - Takeuchi, Hiroyoshi

AU - Nakajima, Shinichiro

AU - Nomura, Kensuke

AU - Uchida, Hiroyuki

AU - Yagi, Gohei

AU - Watanabe, Koichiro

AU - Kashima, Haruo

PY - 2010/10

Y1 - 2010/10

N2 - The magnitude of rater differences, instead of interrater reliability, in the assessment scales of schizophrenia has rarely been investigated and was therefore addressed in this study.Thirty-six patients with schizophrenia were independently assessed by 4 expert physicians, using clinical rating scales including the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The scores obtained by the physician in charge (PIC), who had a long close contact with the patients, served as the referent answer for the purpose of this study. The scores rated by the other 3 non-PIC psychiatrists, who had a first formal examination with them, were evaluated for percentage deviance from the referent answer.The results showed that the PIC raters endorsed the numerically highest score in 20 (56%) of the 36 patients, whereas they rated the lowest in only 2 (6%) in the PANSS total score. The non-PIC assessors on the average underrated the PANSS total score by 10%, and such a tendency of underestimating the severity was noted across other clinical scales. Furthermore, the PANSS total score by one of the non-PIC physicians was deviant from the referent answer by at least 20% in 15 (42%) of 36 instances. Importantly, this magnitude of deviance was noted in the context of an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92.This unique investigation disclosed clinically pertinent differences among raters, even under an excellent interrater reliability. The magnitude of differences described herein seems to be an underestimation, and the baseline scores by the independent new raters might need to be corrected for those by the PICs.

AB - The magnitude of rater differences, instead of interrater reliability, in the assessment scales of schizophrenia has rarely been investigated and was therefore addressed in this study.Thirty-six patients with schizophrenia were independently assessed by 4 expert physicians, using clinical rating scales including the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The scores obtained by the physician in charge (PIC), who had a long close contact with the patients, served as the referent answer for the purpose of this study. The scores rated by the other 3 non-PIC psychiatrists, who had a first formal examination with them, were evaluated for percentage deviance from the referent answer.The results showed that the PIC raters endorsed the numerically highest score in 20 (56%) of the 36 patients, whereas they rated the lowest in only 2 (6%) in the PANSS total score. The non-PIC assessors on the average underrated the PANSS total score by 10%, and such a tendency of underestimating the severity was noted across other clinical scales. Furthermore, the PANSS total score by one of the non-PIC physicians was deviant from the referent answer by at least 20% in 15 (42%) of 36 instances. Importantly, this magnitude of deviance was noted in the context of an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92.This unique investigation disclosed clinically pertinent differences among raters, even under an excellent interrater reliability. The magnitude of differences described herein seems to be an underestimation, and the baseline scores by the independent new raters might need to be corrected for those by the PICs.

KW - assessment

KW - interrater reliability

KW - PANSS

KW - rater differences

KW - schizophrenia

KW - validity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957273380&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957273380&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/JCP.0b013e3181f0bae1

DO - 10.1097/JCP.0b013e3181f0bae1

M3 - Article

C2 - 20814326

AN - SCOPUS:77957273380

VL - 30

SP - 607

EP - 611

JO - Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology

JF - Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology

SN - 0271-0749

IS - 5

ER -