Skip to main content
Full access
Published Online: 17 May 2019

Chapter 1. Principles of Assessment of Mood Disorders in Childhood

Publication: Clinical Handbook for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pediatric Mood Disorders
It has been 4 months since Blue broke up with his girlfriend. They dated until his fifteenth birthday, when Blue discovered that she was flirting with another guy in his class on social media. Blue was heartbroken when they ended their steady relationship, crying every day and having trouble sleeping. After a couple of weeks, he felt better, convincing himself that he was better off without her and could now spend more time focusing on his schoolwork. A month later, Blue started to feel down again, initially for a few days at a time, and then eventually more frequently, to the point at which he would snap at his friends and family nearly every day. Much like his mom, he viewed the glass as half empty, and he spent most of nearly every day in a low mood. It would take him 2–3 hours to fall asleep most nights, and several times a week he found himself awoken from sleep by a nightmare or needing to use the bathroom. He would feel tired the next day from fitful sleep and would drag himself out of bed, frequently missing his first period in school. Blue spent most of the time watching videos on the Internet or listening to heavy metal music in his room. He no longer enjoyed wrestling, playing the saxophone, or hanging out with his friends over the weekend. Instead, he would sneak junk food into his room, and sometimes he would get high with edible marijuana brownies to escape from his troubles. Candy would lift him out of a low mood for just enough time for him to start his homework, but then he would get distracted, look at himself in the mirror, feel guilty for overeating, and fall back into a slump. Consequently, his grades started to fall, and his teachers expressed concern. After several weeks, Blue started to feel hopeless that he wouldn’t be able to catch up in school and wondered whether he would be better off dead. This thought scared him, so he asked his mom to take him to his pediatrician.
What principles apply for the initial assessment of Blue? In the pediatrician’s busy practice, what questions can be asked and what assessments can be conducted to determine whether Blue’s condition can be managed in a primary care setting? How would the pediatrician know when to refer Blue to more specialized care? How does she determine whether Blue has depression or another psychiatric disorder, or is adjusting to his breakup from his girlfriend? How does she determine whether his mood symptoms are secondary to an underlying medical condition or due to recreational drug use? This chapter will aim to provide introductory answers to these questions, which will be elaborated on in specialized ways throughout this handbook.
Even with the burgeoning field of neuroscience and multiple valid screening and assessment tools, the gold-standard approach to the diagnosis of mood disorders in youth is still the clinical interview, ideally one involving multiple informants. Clinicians in a variety of settings can ask simple but key questions to assess for mood symptoms in youth and to determine severity, as well as how these symptoms relate to a child’s day-to-day functioning. Once a core low or elevated mood symptom is endorsed, its persistence, associated factors, and functional impact can help a clinician efficiently decide whether it falls within the scope of his or her practice. Underlying neurophysiological contributors such as anemia, altered thyroid function, and vitamin D and lead levels can all be assessed with a single blood draw while referrals for more in-depth evaluations are being considered. Furthermore, asking youth about recreational drug use individually and directly is generally preferred over urine toxicology screening in an outpatient setting. This underscores the point that because no validated diagnostic biomarkers or confirmatory tests for mood disorders yet exist, healthcare providers must rely on clinical criteria and diagnostic acumen to diagnose these conditions early and accurately.
Because symptoms of mood disorders may resemble and co-occur with other conditions or psychiatric problems, a comprehensive assessment of endorsed symptoms as well as pertinent positive and negative symptoms will likely yield the most accurate primary and secondary diagnoses, which may merit a more in-depth interview or referral to a mental health professional. Indeed, life problems such as a relationship breakup, academic stress, or bullying can trigger and perpetuate mood symptoms. One goal of a careful diagnostic assessment is to help a patient cultivate insight about what factors contribute to triggering, perpetuating, or alleviating mood symptoms. Helping the patient describe symptoms in his or her own words supports this goal and establishes an early alliance between the patient and clinician for the purpose of understanding mood symptoms and their impact and for collaboratively monitoring these symptoms as they evolve with treatment.
Children and adolescents may experience a spectrum of mood symptoms, which in early stages of development may be ill-defined diagnostically and may change over time. For example, the most common first episode in bipolar disorder is a depressive episode that, when treated with an antidepressant, may trigger mania or mania-like symptoms. To ensure that the full spectrum of mood disorders is considered at any and all clinical evaluations of a child presenting with mood symptoms, all index mood symptoms, including sad mood, anhedonia, and irritability for major depressive disorder (MDD) and explosive irritability and euphoria for bipolar disorder, should be considered and explored. Index mood symptoms are solicited in the patient’s own words first, followed by secondary or “Criterion B” symptoms of depression and mania as defined in DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association 2013).
In MDD, S-I-G-E-C-A-P-S remains a popular mnemonic, where S generally stands for sleep abnormalities (insomnia or hypersomnia; initial/middle/terminal), I for diminished interest or pleasure in the things youth normally find to be fun, G for guilt or self-blame, E for low energy, C for concentration difficulties or poor decision making, A for appetite changes (increases or decreases with corresponding weight changes), P for psychomotor agitation or retardation, and S for suicidal ideation or related behavior. A major depressive episode requires at least 2 weeks of an index depressed mood and four additional Criterion B symptoms. In bipolar disorder, index euphoria on a daily basis for over 50% of the day for at least a week is accompanied by at least three additional symptoms (four if the index mood is explosive irritability) and is captured in the mnemonic D-I-G-F-A-S-T, where D stands for distractibility or motor hyperactivity, I for increased goal-directed activity, G for grandiosity, F for flight of ideas and racing thoughts, A for accelerated speech, S for decreased need for sleep, and T for “trouble,” or engagement with impulsive risk-taking or hypersexual behaviors that have the potential for dangerous consequences for the patient or others. In youth, general examples of high-risk behaviors include staying out all night, spending a lot of money, and taking trips unexpectedly. Adolescents might report that during a manic episode, they got involved in relationships quickly, had a lot of one-night stands, or drove recklessly. Preadolescents might also report that they jumped from elevated places, went on long trips without planning or supervision, played serious pranks in school, or engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior during mania. These symptoms manifest differently depending on age and should therefore be contextualized developmentally.
Establishing the timeline of onset and offset of mood symptoms early in the interview allows a clinician to quickly and easily rule in or rule out a major mood disorder such as bipolar I disorder or MDD. The clinician can then proceed systematically down a list of potential diagnoses of exclusion and co-occurring conditions. Unfortunately, clinicians in naturalistic and often busy clinical settings tend to underuse DSM, frequently not collecting sufficient information to establish a correct diagnosis for most psychiatric disorders (Nakash et al. 2015). Moreover, research diagnostic assessments and clinical evaluations have only low to moderate agreement (Rettew et al. 2009). Missing diagnostic information may result in poor reliability and clinical decision making (Jensen-Doss et al. 2014), delaying effective treatment or resulting in the implementation of inappropriate, costly, or potentially harmful treatments. Thus, accurate and effective diagnostic skills can prevent adverse clinical and financial outcomes at multiple levels.
Indeed, efforts to systematically evaluate clinicians’ assessment processes in naturalistic settings may help to identify the best diagnostic probes to use in clinical practice to improve diagnostic accuracy and efficiency. For the busy clinician, access to a toolkit of feasible assessments that are integrated into practice and supported by billing structures may facilitate use of more systematic approaches to making a diagnosis. Several measurement-based care solutions are being developed by for-profit and not-for-profit organizations to try to improve real-time clinical decision making, enhance reimbursement, and optimize resource utilization in behavioral health. Because measurement-based care is still emerging, data to demonstrate its efficacy in improving diagnostic accuracy and treatment outcomes are still pending. What follows is a brief summary of some well-validated structured clinical interviews and clinical and self-report rating scales we have used frequently in research and in clinical practice. Validity measurements for these assessments are widely available, but there is no substitute for personal experience for becoming proficient at conducting these assessments and determining their utility in measuring symptom severity or treatment response or predicting long-term outcome.

Structured and Semi-structured Clinical Interviews

The gold-standard method for evaluating for a pediatric mood disorder is to use structured or semi-structured clinical interviews. Researchers and clinicians use this method for its systematic approach to ruling in and ruling out a psychiatric diagnosis, and such assessments serve as benchmarks for comparisons with other methods of deriving a psychiatric diagnosis, including self-, parent-, or teacher-administered instruments or observations. Although the specificity of a mood disorder diagnosis remains high between a structured clinical interview and a self-administered instrument, the sensitivity decreases, so the most reliable method of identifying cases of MDD remains the structured clinical interview (Martin et al. 2017). Importantly, a family history of depression increases the chances of a more reliable diagnosis from a structured interview than from a self-administered rating, suggesting some advantage of having a family member with depression to improve reliable reporting of depressive symptoms (Verweij et al. 2011). On the other hand, sometimes parents affected by mood disorder symptoms experience an attribution bias, projecting symptoms onto their children or other family members. When there is a misattribution, this can cause undue stress in a family and consequent overdiagnosis and treatment seeking in youth who are otherwise well adapted. A systematic assessment of mood and other psychopathology in parents can provide important context for how symptoms are reported in a child. Thus, for all youth presenting with mood symptoms, a family history of mood and other psychiatric disorders not only informs risk and prognostic factors but also contextualizes the potential for informant bias.
There are two main disadvantages of using a structured clinical interview: 1) the time that it takes to train on and conduct these interviews, and 2) the cost associated with having an expert rater conduct these interviews. In contrast, studies have shown that patients have a high acceptance of and satisfaction with structured interviews even when their clinicians estimate that patients’ acceptance would be lower than it actually is (Bruchmüller et al. 2011). Anecdotal feedback frequently given by patients who receive both a clinical psychiatric interview and a research-based structured diagnostic interview suggests that the latter makes them feel heard and increases their confidence that an accurate diagnosis is being made. Structured interviews abidingly attempt to comprehensively capture all symptoms experienced, with follow-up clarifying questions posed to determine levels of associated impairment. Such interviews can increase the number of diagnoses ascribed to a patient but reduce the number of nonspecific (e.g., “unspecified”; formerly “not otherwise specified”) diagnoses given (Matuschek et al. 2016).
Several structured clinical interviews have been validated for youth with mood disorders across the age spectrum (Table 1–1). The relative strengths and limitations of the most commonly used interview instruments have been reviewed by Leffler et al. (2015), who suggest that in order to choose the most appropriate instrument for diagnostic decision making and treatment planning, the clinician begin the interview with a bio-psycho-sociocultural history, to increase the success and reliability of the diagnostic interview. In the young child, the Preschool Age Psychiatric Assessment (PAPA) has been validated for administration to parents of youth between 2 and 7 years of age (Egger et al. 2006). This parent interview has proven useful both to characterize symptom manifestations of mood disorders in very young children (Luby and Belden 2008) and to predict future patterns of psychopathology in school-age children (Dougherty et al. 2015; Kertz et al. 2017) and adolescents (Finsaas et al. 2018; Luby et al. 2014). As demonstrated by systematic prospective follow-up using age-appropriate structured clinical interviews, preschool-onset depression is no longer considered a developmentally transient syndrome; rather, it is thought to be a chronic and recurrent syndrome that may evolve and warrant observation over time.
TABLE 1–1. Structured and semi-structured clinical interviews for pediatric mood disorders
Clinical interview
Age validated for use
Description
Preschool Age Psychiatric Assessment (PAPA; Egger et al. 2006)
2–7 years
Structured assessment used to interview parents about preschool-age youth down to age 2 for DSM-related mood and other psychiatric symptoms and disorders
Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia—Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL; Kaufman et al. 1997)
6–17 years
Semi-structured interview that combines dimensional and categorical assessment approaches to diagnose current and past episodes of psychopathology in children and adolescents using DSM criteria
Washington University (St. Louis) Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (WASH-U K-SADS; Geller et al. 2001)
6–17 years
Specialized and expanded semi-structured interview for the diagnosis of mood disorders; sometimes combined with the K-SADS-PL to provide a complete assessment of all current and past psychopathologies
Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview for Children and Adolescents (MINI-KID; Sheehan et al. 2010)
6–17 years
A short, structured diagnostic interview for DSM and ICD-10 psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents; standard version assesses the 30 most common and clinically relevant disorders or disorder subtypes in pediatric mental health; tracking yields a quantitative score that can be used to monitor treatment response over time
Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 (SCID-5; First et al. 2016)
18 years and over
A semi-structured interview guide to making the major DSM-5 diagnoses in adults; it is administered by a clinician or trained mental health professional who is familiar with the DSM-5 classification and diagnostic criteria; the interview subjects may be either psychiatric or general medical patients—or individuals who do not identify themselves as patients, such as participants in a community survey of mental illness or family members of psychiatric patients
Family Interview for Genetic Studies (FIGS; Maxwell 1982)
All ages
Interview used to assess psychopathology in all first- and second-degree relatives
Family History—Research Diagnostic Criteria (FH-RDC; Andreasen et al. 1977)
All ages
Interview used to assess psychopathology in all first- and second-degree relatives
Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Evaluation (LIFE; Keller et al. 1987)
All ages
Interview used to longitudinally track mood and other psychiatric symptoms; the LIFE interview provides a weekly longitudinal assessment of mood and psychotic symptoms and suicidal ideation
In school-age children 6 years and older, trained interviewers assess for the presence or absence of a psychiatric disorder by semi-structured diagnostic interviews administered separately to youth and their parents (about the youth). Interviews from which to choose include the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (for School-Age Children)—Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL; Kaufman et al. 1997); the mood sections of the Washington University (St. Louis) Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (WASH-U K-SADS; Geller et al. 2001), for more detailed questions about the nature and course of childhood-onset mood disorders; and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview for Children and Adolescents (MINI-KID; Sheehan et al. 2010). The latest version of the K-SADS-PL combines dimensional and categorical assessment approaches to diagnose current and past episodes of psychopathology in children and adolescents according to DSM-5 criteria. Probes included in the interview illustrate ways to elicit information but are not intended to be recited verbatim; thus, the interview is considered semi-structured. Rather, the interviewer is encouraged to adjust the probes to the developmental level of the child, and to use language provided by the parent and child when asking about specific symptoms. Parent and child ratings may be optimally obtained separately, and summary ratings are achieved by including all sources of information (i.e., parent, child, school, chart, or other). The order of administration may vary case by case, but in general, it is recommended that the interviewer conduct the parent interview first for preadolescents and the child interview first for adolescents. When discrepancies between sources of information arise, the rater uses clinical judgment to determine the final summary score, and possibly probes the informants further about discrepant information.
Mood disorders frequently run in families. Although systematic and quantitative data on familial aggregation of mood disorders are still emerging (Fears et al. 2014), it is well recognized that offspring of parents who are both affected by mood disorders are far more likely to have a mood disorder compared with families in which only one parent is affected (Goodwin and Jamison 1990). The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 (SCID-5; First et al. 2016) and a family history interview such as the Family Interview for Genetic Studies (FIGS; Maxwell 1982) or the Family History—Research Diagnostic Criteria (FH-RDC; Andreasen et al. 1977) may be administered in order to assess parental and other family history of mood and other psychiatric disorders. Both the FIGS and the FH-RDC start with a pedigree drawing, which can be a great way to organize and stratify family history loading based on first-, second-, and other degree-relative psychiatric family histories. Any clinical encounter of a youth with mood symptoms should assess for mood symptoms and disorders (specifically bipolar and depressive disorders), suicide completions, sudden death, substance use, and schizophrenia in family members. This information can then be used both diagnostically and for treatment planning.
To track psychiatric symptoms in youth over time, the Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Evaluation (LIFE; Keller et al. 1987) provides a weekly prospective assessment of mood, psychotic, and other psychiatric symptoms tracked on a week-by-week basis using this instrument’s Psychiatric Status Rating (PSR) scales. The PSR scales assign numeric values that can be operationally linked to DSM criteria, with assessment made in the interview and then translated into ratings for each week of the follow-up period. The ratings reflect symptom severity and impairment during an episode and capture periods of recurrence or recovery. For mood disorders, scores on the PSR scales may range from 1 for no symptoms to 2–4 for varying levels of subthreshold symptoms and impairment to 5–6 for presentations that meet full criteria with high levels of symptom severity and functional impairment. A consensus score between parents and children is established after each of them is interviewed individually.
The LIFE and other commonly used structured and semi-structured interviews are summarized in Table 1–1.

Clinician-Administered Instruments

Clinician-administered rating scales can provide objective assessments of time-varying and dimensionally scaled mood symptoms and their response to treatment. Clinical rating scales are available for depression; mania; suicide; co-occurring conditions such as anxiety and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); and global functioning. Scales commonly used for the assessment of pediatric depression and mania are summarized below (see Table 1–2 for brief descriptions of these assessments and other assessments used in clinical practice.)
TABLE 1–2. Clinician-administered mood symptom severity assessments
Clinical assessment
Age validated for use
Description
Children’s Depression Rating Scale—Revised (CDRS-R; Poznanski et al. 1984)
6–17 years
A scale used to evaluate depressive symptoms based on DSM criteria; core symptoms of depression are rated according to CDRS-R criteria and anchors; in research, these questions are administered by trained raters separately to youth and children
Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS; Young et al. 1978)
4–17 years
A scale used to dimensionally assess mania severity; symptoms of hypomania and mania are assessed using the clinician-rated YMRS; the YMRS has 11 items, with total scores ranging from 0 (no manic symptoms) to 60 (severely manic); manic symptoms are rated on a 0–4 scale, with some item scores doubled to weigh for their clinical importance and low base rate; the YMRS has been used as a clinician-rated instrument in juvenile bipolar disorder and has demonstrated good reliability and good ability to discriminate bipolar spectrum disorders from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; study clinicians will assess symptoms using this scale at every visit and will enter scores on the case report form
Columbia–Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS; Posner et al. 2011)
5–17 years
Clinician-rated measure used to assess lifetime suicide severity symptoms; C-SSRS has 18 items with yes/no responses and quantified number and lethality of attempts
Clinical Global Impression—Severity (CGI-S) and —Improvement (CGI-I; Busner and Targum 2007)
All ages
Readily understood, practical measurement tool that can easily be administered by a clinician in a busy clinical practice setting; functions as a stand-alone assessment of the clinician’s view of the patient’s global functioning prior to and after initiation of a study medication; provides an overall clinician-determined summary measure that takes into account knowledge of the patient’s history, psychosocial circumstances, symptoms, behavior, and impact of the symptoms on the patient’s ability to function
Children’s Global Assessment Scale (CGAS; Shaffer et al. 1983)
6–17 years
A rating of functioning in which a child is given a single score between 1 and 100, based on a clinician’s assessment of a range of aspects related to the child’s psychological and social functioning; the score puts the youth in one of 10 categories that range from “extremely impaired” (1–10) to “doing very well” (91–100)
The Children’s Depression Rating Scale—Revised (CDRS-R; Poznanski et al. 1984) is a clinician-administered interview conducted with parents and children separately to capture depression symptom severity and its impact on multiple areas of functioning. The CDRS-R has several advantages over self-report measures of depression: 1) it provides the presence or resolution of a comprehensive list of depressive symptoms that may have meaningful associations with neurobiological function (e.g., brain imaging measures), 2) it contextualizes depressive symptoms in terms of levels of severity and impact on daily function, 3) it only takes 10–15 minutes to complete, 4) it is empirically derived and validated and has been used widely as a primary outcome measure for clinical trials in youth with mood disorders (Mayes et al. 2010) and has been found to be preferable to adult depression rating scales (Jain et al. 2007), 5) it is administered to both parent and child and allows for clinician observation of symptoms to provide multi-informant data, and 6) it generates a raw score and a scaled T score normed for a population of youth with accompanying interpretation about the likelihood of a depressive disorder or the need for diagnostic confirmation. These features provide some advantages that are appealing for implementation into clinical practice once adapted.
Symptoms of hypomania and mania are commonly assessed by using the clinician-rated Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS; Young et al. 1978). The YMRS has 11 items, with total scores ranging from 0 (no manic symptoms) to 60 (severely manic). Manic symptoms are rated on a scale of 0 to 4, with some item scores doubled to weight their clinical importance or low base rate (i.e., irritability, speech, thought content, and disruptive/aggressive behavior). The YMRS and other pediatric mania severity scales (e.g., Child Mania Rating Scale; C-MRS) have demonstrated good reliability and discriminant validity to distinguish bipolar spectrum disorders from unipolar depression (Yee et al. 2006) and commonly co-occurring conditions such as ADHD (Pavuluri et al. 2006). Moreover, the YMRS has been used as the primary mania severity outcome measure in clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of pharmacological interventions for mood stabilization.
The YMRS and CDRS-R provide dimensionally useful summary scores for mania and depression severity that can be tracked over time. The summary scores, although informative clinically, may represent a combination of heterogeneous clinical constructs (Isa et al. 2014) that may or may not map onto single or specific biological targets. Neuroscience tools such as multimodal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have emerged in the last 20 years that hold increasing promise for advancing mechanistic understanding of how aberrant structure and function in brain regions contribute to the onset, persistence, and recurrence of mood symptoms and episodes from childhood, adolescence, and in transition to adulthood. Taken together, these studies have consistently shown that altered interactions between prefrontal and subcortical brain regions are central to mood disorders, resulting in dysfunctional regulation or imbalance of emotion and cognitive processes. However, there is still much to be learned about these processes over the course of development, and MRI is still a research rather than a diagnostic or clinical tool. Indeed, more work is needed to translate the clinically meaningful experience and observation of depression and mania into measurable biological units. Nevertheless, clinician-based assessments have demonstrated utility in research and clinical practice.

Self-Administered Instruments

Self-administered instruments may be more time- and cost-efficient compared with clinically administered interviews and rating scales and, when completed in earnest by youth, can give patients the opportunity to share their experience with mood symptoms without confrontation. This may be particularly useful for patients with impairments in social functioning due to mood disorders (e.g., anxious depression), or in a busy clinical practice when time for clinical assessments is limited. For example, many primary care offices use the Patient Health Questionnaire–9 (PHQ-9), which scores each of the nine DSM criteria for depression as 0 (“not at all”) to 3 (“nearly every day”) and has been validated for use in pediatric primary care (Allgaier et al. 2012). Similarly, efforts to screen for pediatric-onset mania have been described that involve administering parents a 10-item version of the General Behavioral Inventory (GBI) in an outpatient setting (Youngstrom et al. 2008). However, when measured against gold-standard clinical interviews, self-administered instruments either underestimate or overestimate the probability of a psychiatric diagnosis. For example, children who score at or near the clinical thresholds at which sensitivity and specificity are optimized are unlikely to meet criteria for psychopathology on gold-standard interviews (Sheldrick et al. 2015). Thus, self-administered scales and other instruments used to screen for depression should be interpreted probabilistically, with consideration of where an individual may fall along a continuum of positive scores, rather than used to categorically assign a diagnosis. Thus, because of varying degrees of accuracy and reliability, youth who screen positive for depression should be followed up with a comprehensive clinical evaluation whenever possible. Some commonly used self-report instruments for pediatric mood disorders are summarized in Table 1–3.
TABLE 1–3. Self-administered mood assessments
Self- or parent-rated assessment
Age validated for use
Description
Patient Health Questionnaire–9 (PHQ-9; Kroenke et al. 2001)
11–17 years
A self-administered diagnostic instrument for depression that scores each of the nine DSM criteria as 0 (“not at all”) to 3 (“nearly every day”)
10-item mania assessment from the Parent General Behavior Inventory (P-GBI; Youngstrom et al. 2008)
5–17 years
A brief (10-item) instrument used to assess for parent-reported mania in outpatients presenting with a variety of different DSM diagnoses, including frequent comorbid conditions; parents most notice elated mood, high energy, irritability, and rapid changes in mood and energy as the prominent features of juvenile bipolar disorder
Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) (Achenbach and Rescorla 2001) (includes Youth Self-Report [YSR])
6–18 years
A 113-item parent report of a child’s behavior containing eight subscales: aggressive behavior, anxious/depressed, attention problems, rule-breaking behavior, somatic complaints, social problems, thought problems, and withdrawn/depressed; the Youth Self-Report is the corresponding behavior checklist completed by youth down to age 6
How I Feel (HIF; Walden et al. 2003)
8–12 years
A 30-item child self-report measure of emotion and arousal assessing the frequency and intensity of positive and negative emotion, and positive and negative emotion control; children are asked to rate how true each item is for him or her using a 5-point Likert scale (1=“not at all true of me” to 5=“very true of me”)
Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS; Snaith et al. 1995)
Down to age 14 years (Leventhal et al. 2015)
A 14-item self-rated scale of hedonic function; items on the SHAPS may be scored from 1 to 4 (1=“strongly disagree” to 4=“strongly agree”)
Behavioral
Inhibition–Behavioral Activation Scale (BIS-BAS; De Decker et al. 2017)
5–17 years
A 40-item checklist assessing behavioral inhibition and activation in youth; children are asked to rate how true each item is for them on a 4-point Likert scale (1=“very true for me” to 4=“very false for me”)
Early and accurate detection and treatment of pediatric-onset mood disorders may reduce the severity, chronicity, and treatment-resistant characteristics commonly observed in these disorders in adulthood (Chang et al. 2006). Differential diagnosis of mood disorders in children and adolescents, however, is especially challenging. First, there is a significant overlap in mood symptoms and other psychiatric disorders, notably ADHD and anxiety disorders. Second, mood symptoms in youth are often overlooked unless they cause clear functional impairment. Third, in certain stages of development, parents tend to be more reliable reporters of mood symptoms than are children, yet some clinicians rely exclusively on child report. Finally, a “backlash” against the possible overdiagnosis of certain mood disorders in youth (e.g., bipolar disorder) may cause some clinicians to err on the side of using “unspecified” diagnoses, or they may have doubts about the significance of the mood symptoms (Safer et al. 2015). These issues may adversely affect the reliability of diagnosis of mood disorders in routine clinical practice.
Mood disorders are increasing in prevalence in youth and are treatable. Effective management of mood symptoms begins with a careful multi-informant assessment that is bio-psycho-social-culturally informed and continually updated as a child grows. With early detection and timely intervention, perhaps children experiencing mood disorders early in life can grow to never experience a serious mood episode as adults.

References

Achenbach TM, Rescorla LA: Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms and Profiles: An Integrated System of Multi-informant Assessment. Burlington, VT, University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families, 2001
Allgaier A-K, Pietsch K, Frühe B, et al: Screening for depression in adolescents: validity of the Patient Health Questionnaire in pediatric care. Depress Anxiety 29(10):906–913, 2012 22753313
American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition. Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Association, 2013
Andreasen NC, Endicott J, Spitzer RL, et al: The family history method using diagnostic criteria: reliability and validity. Arch Gen Psychiatry 34(10):1229–1235, 1977 911222
Bruchmüller K, Margraf J, Suppiger A, et al: Popular or unpopular? Therapists’ use of structured interviews and their estimation of patient acceptance. Behav Ther 42(4):634–643, 2011 22035992
Busner J, Targum SD: The clinical global impressions scale: applying a research tool in clinical practice. Psychiatry (Edgmont) 4(7):28–37, 2007 20526405
Chang K, Howe M, Gallelli K, et al: Prevention of pediatric bipolar disorder: integration of neurobiological and psychosocial processes. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1094:235–247, 2006 17347355
De Decker A, Verbeken S, Sioen I, et al: BIS/BAS scale in primary school children: parent-child agreement and longitudinal stability. Behav Change 34(2):98–116, 2017
Dougherty LR, Smith VC, Bufferd SJ, et al: Preschool irritability predicts child psychopathology, functional impairment, and service use at age nine. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 56(9):999–1007, 2015 26259142
Egger HL, Erkanli A, Keeler G, et al: Test-retest reliability of the Preschool Age Psychiatric Assessment (PAPA). J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 45(5):538–549, 2006 16601400
Fears SC, Service SK, Kremeyer B, et al: Multisystem component phenotypes of bipolar disorder for genetic investigations of extended pedigrees. JAMA Psychiatry 71(4):375–387, 2014 24522887
Finsaas MC, Bufferd SJ, Dougherty LR, et al: Preschool psychiatric disorders: homotypic and heterotypic continuity through middle childhood and early adolescence. Psychol Med Jan 16, 2018 [Epub ahead of print] 29335030
First MB, Williams J, Karg R, et al: Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5—Clinician Version (SCID-5-CV). Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Association, 2016
Geller B, Zimerman B, Williams M, et al: Reliability of the Washington University in St. Louis Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (WASH-U-KSADS) mania and rapid cycling sections. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 40(4):450–455, 2001 11314571
Goodwin FK, Jamison K: Manic-Depressive Illness. New York, Oxford University Press, 1990
Isa A, Bernstein I, Trivedi M, et al: Childhood depression subscales using repeated sessions on Children’s Depression Rating Scale—Revised (CDRS-R) scores. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol 24(6):318–324, 2014 25137188
Jain S, Carmody TJ, Trivedi MH, et al: A psychometric evaluation of the CDRS and MADRS in assessing depressive symptoms in children. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 46(9):1204–1212, 2007 17712244
Jensen-Doss A, Youngstrom EA, Youngstrom JK, et al: Predictors and moderators of agreement between clinical and research diagnoses for children and adolescents. J Consult Clin Psychol 82(6):1151–1162, 2014 24773574
Kaufman J, Birmaher B, Brent D, et al: Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children—Present and Lifetime version (K-SADS-PL): initial reliability and validity data. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 36(7):980–988, 1997 9204677
Keller MB, Lavori PW, Friedman B, et al: The Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Evaluation: a comprehensive method for assessing outcome in prospective longitudinal studies. Arch Gen Psychiatry 44(6):540–548, 1987 3579500
Kertz SJ, Sylvester C, Tillman R, et al: Latent class profiles of anxiety symptom trajectories from preschool through school age. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol Mar 20, 2017 [Epub ahead of print] 28318338
Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB: The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 16(9):606–613, 2001 11556941
Leffler JM, Riebel J, Hughes HM: A review of child and adolescent diagnostic interviews for clinical practitioners. Assessment 22(6):690–703, 2015 25520212
Leventhal AM, Unger JB, Audrain-McGovern J, et al: Measuring anhedonia in adolescents: a psychometric analysis. J Pers Assess 97(5):506–514, 2015 25893676
Luby JL, Belden AC: Clinical characteristics of bipolar vs. unipolar depression in preschool children: an empirical investigation. J Clin Psychiatry 69(12):1960–1969, 2008 19192470
Luby JL, Gaffrey MS, Tillman R, et al: Trajectories of preschool disorders to full DSM depression at school age and early adolescence: continuity of preschool depression. Am J Psychiatry 171(7):768–776, 2014 24700355
Martin J, Streit F, Treutlein J, et al: Expert and self-assessment of lifetime symptoms and diagnosis of major depressive disorder in large-scale genetic studies in the general population: comparison of a clinical interview and a self-administered checklist. Psychiatr Genet 27(5):187–196, 2017 28731911
Matuschek T, Jaeger S, Stadelmann S, et al: Implementing the K-SADS-PL as a standard diagnostic tool: effects on clinical diagnoses. Psychiatry Res 236:119–124, 2016 26724908
Maxwell E: Manual for the FIGS. Rockville, MD, Clinical Neurogenetics Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Mental Health, 1982
Mayes TL, Bernstein IH, Haley CL, et al: Psychometric properties of the Children’s Depression Rating Scale—Revised in adolescents. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol 20(6):513–516, 2010 21186970
Nakash O, Nagar M, Kanat-Maymon Y: Clinical use of the DSM categorical diagnostic system during the mental health intake session. J Clin Psychiatry 76(7):e862–e869, 2015 26231013
Pavuluri MN, Henry DB, Devineni B, et al: Child Mania Rating Scale: development, reliability, and validity. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 45(5):550–560, 2006 16601399
Posner K, Brown GK, Stanley B, et al: The Columbia–Suicide Severity Rating Scale: initial validity and internal consistency findings from three multisite studies with adolescents and adults. Am J Psychiatry 168(12):1266–1277, 2011 22193671
Poznanski EO, Grossman JA, Buchsbaum Y, et al: Preliminary studies of the reliability and validity of the Children’s Depression Rating Scale. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry 23(2):191–197, 1984 6715741
Rettew DC, Lynch AD, Achenbach TM, et al: Meta-analyses of agreement between diagnoses made from clinical evaluations and standardized diagnostic interviews. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 18(3):169–184, 2009 19701924
Safer DJ, Rajakannan T, Burcu M, et al: Trends in subthreshold psychiatric diagnoses for youth in community treatment. JAMA Psychiatry 72(1):75–83, 2015 25426673
Shaffer D, Gould MS, Brasic J, et al: A children’s global assessment scale (CGAS). Arch Gen Psychiatry 40(11):1228–1231, 1983 6639293
Sheehan DV, Sheehan KH, Shytle RD, et al: Reliability and validity of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview for Children and Adolescents (MINI-KID). J Clin Psychiatry 71(3):313–326, 2010 20331933
Sheldrick RC, Benneyan JC, Kiss IG, et al: Thresholds and accuracy in screening tools for early detection of psychopathology. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 56(9):936–948, 2015 26096036
Snaith RP, Hamilton M, Morley S, et al: A scale for the assessment of hedonic tone: the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale. Br J Psychiatry 167(1):99–103, 1995 7551619
Verweij KHW, Derks EM, Hendriks EJE, et al: The influence of informant characteristics on the reliability of family history interviews. Twin Res Hum Genet 14(3):217–220, 2011 21623650
Walden TA, Harris VS, Catron TF: How I Feel: a self-report measure of emotional arousal and regulation for children. Psychol Assess 15(3):399–412, 2003 14593841
Yee AM, Algorta GP, Youngstrom EA, et al: Unfiltered administration of the YMRS and CDRS-R in a clinical sample of children. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 44(6):992–1007, 2006 24885078
Young RC, Biggs JT, Ziegler VE, et al: A rating scale for mania: reliability, validity and sensitivity. Br J Psychiatry 133:429–435, 1978 728692
Youngstrom EA, Frazier TW, Demeter C, et al: Developing a 10-item mania scale from the Parent General Behavior Inventory for children and adolescents. J Clin Psychiatry 69(5):831–839, 2008 18452343

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Clinical Handbook for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pediatric Mood Disorders
Clinical Handbook for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pediatric Mood Disorders
Pages: 3 - 22

History

Published in print: 17 May 2019
Published online: 5 December 2024
© American Psychiatric Association Publishing

Authors

Details

Manpreet Kaur Singh, M.D., M.S.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

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

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/EPUB

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

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.).

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share