Sherlock Holmes and child psychopathology assessment approaches: The case of the false-positive

Peter S. Jensen, Henry Watanabe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

42 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To explore the relative value of various methods of assessing childhood psychopathology, the authors compared 4 groups of children: those who met criteria for one or more DSM diagnoses and scored high on parent symptom checklists, those who met psychopathology criteria on either one of these two assessment approaches alone, and those who met no psychopathology assessment criterion Method: Parents of 201 children completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), after which children and parents were administered the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (version 2.1). Children and parents also completed other survey measures and symptom report inventories. The 4 groups of children were compared against 'external validators' to examine the merits of 'false-positive' and 'false-negative' cases. Results: True-positive cases (those that met DSM criteria and scored high on the CBCL) differed significantly from the true-negative cases on most external validators. 'False-positive' and 'false-negative' cases had intermediate levels of most risk factors and external validators. 'False-positive' cases were not normal per se because they scored significantly above the true- negative group on a number of risk factors and external validators. A similar but less marked pattern was noted for 'false-negatives.' Conclusions: Findings call into question whether cases with high symptom checklist scores despite no formal diagnoses should be considered 'false-positive.' Pending the availability of robust markers for mental illness, researchers and clinicians must resist the tendency to reify diagnostic categories or to engage in arcane debates about the superiority of one assessment approach over another.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)138-146
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Volume38
Issue number2
StatePublished - 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Psychopathology
Checklist
Parents
Child Behavior
Appointments and Schedules
Research Personnel
Interviews
Equipment and Supplies

Keywords

  • Assessment
  • Behavioral scales
  • Child Behavior Checklist
  • Diagnosis
  • Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children
  • Psychopathology
  • Screening

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology

Cite this

Sherlock Holmes and child psychopathology assessment approaches : The case of the false-positive. / Jensen, Peter S.; Watanabe, Henry.

In: Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Vol. 38, No. 2, 1999, p. 138-146.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9de84b64ef7f4789acbea5bef705a6ba,
title = "Sherlock Holmes and child psychopathology assessment approaches: The case of the false-positive",
abstract = "Objective: To explore the relative value of various methods of assessing childhood psychopathology, the authors compared 4 groups of children: those who met criteria for one or more DSM diagnoses and scored high on parent symptom checklists, those who met psychopathology criteria on either one of these two assessment approaches alone, and those who met no psychopathology assessment criterion Method: Parents of 201 children completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), after which children and parents were administered the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (version 2.1). Children and parents also completed other survey measures and symptom report inventories. The 4 groups of children were compared against 'external validators' to examine the merits of 'false-positive' and 'false-negative' cases. Results: True-positive cases (those that met DSM criteria and scored high on the CBCL) differed significantly from the true-negative cases on most external validators. 'False-positive' and 'false-negative' cases had intermediate levels of most risk factors and external validators. 'False-positive' cases were not normal per se because they scored significantly above the true- negative group on a number of risk factors and external validators. A similar but less marked pattern was noted for 'false-negatives.' Conclusions: Findings call into question whether cases with high symptom checklist scores despite no formal diagnoses should be considered 'false-positive.' Pending the availability of robust markers for mental illness, researchers and clinicians must resist the tendency to reify diagnostic categories or to engage in arcane debates about the superiority of one assessment approach over another.",
keywords = "Assessment, Behavioral scales, Child Behavior Checklist, Diagnosis, Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children, Psychopathology, Screening",
author = "Jensen, {Peter S.} and Henry Watanabe",
year = "1999",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "138--146",
journal = "Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry",
issn = "0890-8567",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Sherlock Holmes and child psychopathology assessment approaches

T2 - The case of the false-positive

AU - Jensen, Peter S.

AU - Watanabe, Henry

PY - 1999

Y1 - 1999

N2 - Objective: To explore the relative value of various methods of assessing childhood psychopathology, the authors compared 4 groups of children: those who met criteria for one or more DSM diagnoses and scored high on parent symptom checklists, those who met psychopathology criteria on either one of these two assessment approaches alone, and those who met no psychopathology assessment criterion Method: Parents of 201 children completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), after which children and parents were administered the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (version 2.1). Children and parents also completed other survey measures and symptom report inventories. The 4 groups of children were compared against 'external validators' to examine the merits of 'false-positive' and 'false-negative' cases. Results: True-positive cases (those that met DSM criteria and scored high on the CBCL) differed significantly from the true-negative cases on most external validators. 'False-positive' and 'false-negative' cases had intermediate levels of most risk factors and external validators. 'False-positive' cases were not normal per se because they scored significantly above the true- negative group on a number of risk factors and external validators. A similar but less marked pattern was noted for 'false-negatives.' Conclusions: Findings call into question whether cases with high symptom checklist scores despite no formal diagnoses should be considered 'false-positive.' Pending the availability of robust markers for mental illness, researchers and clinicians must resist the tendency to reify diagnostic categories or to engage in arcane debates about the superiority of one assessment approach over another.

AB - Objective: To explore the relative value of various methods of assessing childhood psychopathology, the authors compared 4 groups of children: those who met criteria for one or more DSM diagnoses and scored high on parent symptom checklists, those who met psychopathology criteria on either one of these two assessment approaches alone, and those who met no psychopathology assessment criterion Method: Parents of 201 children completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), after which children and parents were administered the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (version 2.1). Children and parents also completed other survey measures and symptom report inventories. The 4 groups of children were compared against 'external validators' to examine the merits of 'false-positive' and 'false-negative' cases. Results: True-positive cases (those that met DSM criteria and scored high on the CBCL) differed significantly from the true-negative cases on most external validators. 'False-positive' and 'false-negative' cases had intermediate levels of most risk factors and external validators. 'False-positive' cases were not normal per se because they scored significantly above the true- negative group on a number of risk factors and external validators. A similar but less marked pattern was noted for 'false-negatives.' Conclusions: Findings call into question whether cases with high symptom checklist scores despite no formal diagnoses should be considered 'false-positive.' Pending the availability of robust markers for mental illness, researchers and clinicians must resist the tendency to reify diagnostic categories or to engage in arcane debates about the superiority of one assessment approach over another.

KW - Assessment

KW - Behavioral scales

KW - Child Behavior Checklist

KW - Diagnosis

KW - Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children

KW - Psychopathology

KW - Screening

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032943673&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032943673&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 9951212

AN - SCOPUS:0032943673

VL - 38

SP - 138

EP - 146

JO - Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

JF - Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

SN - 0890-8567

IS - 2

ER -