Site maintenance Wednesday, November 13th, 2024. Please note that access to some content and account information will be unavailable on this date.
Skip to main content
No access
Research Article
Published Online: September 1994

Diagnostic concordance for DSM-IV sleep disorders: a report from the APA/NIMH DSM-IV field trial

Publication: American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The frequency and ranking of DSM-IV sleep disorder diagnoses of clinical patients with complaints of insomnia, as well as rates of diagnostic agreement and disagreement between two types of interviewers, were investigated. METHOD: Interviewers at five clinical sites assessed 216 patients referred for insomnia complaints. One sleep specialist and one general clinician interviewed each patient in an unstructured clinical interview, assigned DSM-IV diagnoses, and indicated their reactions to the diagnostic system. RESULTS: Insomnia due to another mental disorder was the most frequent DSM-IV diagnosis across sites, followed by primary insomnia. Interviewers at the five sites differed significantly in the rankings they assigned to different diagnoses. In addition, sleep specialists at most sites diagnosed psychiatric forms of insomnia more frequently than nonspecialists. Kappa values for agreement between the two types of clinicians on multiple DSM-IV sleep diagnoses ranged from 0.26 to 0.80 across sites, indicating moderate agreement overall. Kappa values for individual diagnoses varied across sites and specific diagnoses and ranged from poor to excellent. Interviewers' ratings of their confidence in diagnoses and the fit and ease of use of the DSM-IV categories also showed significant variability related to site and type of interviewer. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of diagnoses highlights the importance of psychiatric and behavioral factors in the assessment of insomnia. Site- related variability indicates a need for greater standardization in the application of sleep disorder diagnostic criteria. Diagnostic concordance for these diagnoses, while only moderately good, likely reflects actual clinical practice and would be improved through the use of standardized (or structured) interviews and increased training.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to American Journal of Psychiatry
Go to American Journal of Psychiatry
American Journal of Psychiatry
Pages: 1351 - 1360
PubMed: 8067492

History

Published in print: September 1994
Published online: 1 April 2006

Authors

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format
Citation style
Style
Copy to clipboard

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens login
Purchase Options

Purchase this article to access the full text.

PPV Articles - American Journal of Psychiatry

PPV Articles - American Journal of Psychiatry

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/EPUB

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share