Validity and reliability of social anxiety disorder diagnoses in the Swedish National Patient Register.
Epidemiology
Reliability
Social anxiety disorder
Social phobia
Validity
Journal
BMC psychiatry
ISSN: 1471-244X
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968559
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 05 2020
15 05 2020
Historique:
received:
03
10
2019
accepted:
30
04
2020
entrez:
17
5
2020
pubmed:
18
5
2020
medline:
27
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Population-based administrative registers are often used for research purposes. However, their potential usefulness depends on the validity of the registered information. This study assessed the validity of the recorded codes for social anxiety disorder (SAD), also known as social phobia, in the Swedish National Patient Register (NPR). The personal identification numbers of 300 randomly selected individuals with a diagnosis of SAD recorded in the NPR were obtained from the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. The medical files of these individuals were then requested from clinics nationally. A total of 117 files were received and two independent raters reviewed each file to assess the presence or absence of SAD, according to the definition of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Edition (ICD-10) and the diagnostic criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR). When disagreements between the two raters were found, a third rater reviewed the file to establish a best estimate diagnosis. Positive predictive values (PPV) and agreement between the two initial raters (using Cohen's kappa) were calculated. Additionally, raters completed the Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) rating scales for each file. Inter-rater agreement for the CGI-S and the GAF was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). After exclusion of files not containing sufficient information, 95 files were included in the analyses. Of these, 77 files (81.05%) were considered to be 'true positive' cases (PPV = 0.81, 95% confidence interval = 0.72-0.88). Inter-rater agreement regarding the presence or absence of SAD was substantial (κ = 0.72). CGI-S and GAF scores indicated that patients were in the moderate range of severity and functional impairment. Inter-rater agreement for the CGI-S and the GAF was moderate to good (ICC = 0.72 and ICC = 0.82, respectively). The ICD-10 codes for SAD in the Swedish NPR are generally valid and reliable, but we recommend sensitivity analyses in future register-based studies to minimise the impact of potential diagnostic misclassification. Most patients were moderately severe and impaired, suggesting that results from register-based studies of SAD may be generalizable.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Population-based administrative registers are often used for research purposes. However, their potential usefulness depends on the validity of the registered information. This study assessed the validity of the recorded codes for social anxiety disorder (SAD), also known as social phobia, in the Swedish National Patient Register (NPR).
METHODS
The personal identification numbers of 300 randomly selected individuals with a diagnosis of SAD recorded in the NPR were obtained from the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. The medical files of these individuals were then requested from clinics nationally. A total of 117 files were received and two independent raters reviewed each file to assess the presence or absence of SAD, according to the definition of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Edition (ICD-10) and the diagnostic criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR). When disagreements between the two raters were found, a third rater reviewed the file to establish a best estimate diagnosis. Positive predictive values (PPV) and agreement between the two initial raters (using Cohen's kappa) were calculated. Additionally, raters completed the Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) rating scales for each file. Inter-rater agreement for the CGI-S and the GAF was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).
RESULTS
After exclusion of files not containing sufficient information, 95 files were included in the analyses. Of these, 77 files (81.05%) were considered to be 'true positive' cases (PPV = 0.81, 95% confidence interval = 0.72-0.88). Inter-rater agreement regarding the presence or absence of SAD was substantial (κ = 0.72). CGI-S and GAF scores indicated that patients were in the moderate range of severity and functional impairment. Inter-rater agreement for the CGI-S and the GAF was moderate to good (ICC = 0.72 and ICC = 0.82, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
The ICD-10 codes for SAD in the Swedish NPR are generally valid and reliable, but we recommend sensitivity analyses in future register-based studies to minimise the impact of potential diagnostic misclassification. Most patients were moderately severe and impaired, suggesting that results from register-based studies of SAD may be generalizable.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32414335
doi: 10.1186/s12888-020-02644-7
pii: 10.1186/s12888-020-02644-7
pmc: PMC7227192
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
242Subventions
Organisme : Stockholms Läns Landsting
ID : 20180078
Pays : International
Références
Nord J Psychiatry. 2005;59(6):457-64
pubmed: 16316898
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2003 Dec;38(12):728-34
pubmed: 14689178
J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63
pubmed: 27330520
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2002 Nov;37(11):527-31
pubmed: 12395142
Psychol Med. 2003 May;33(4):611-22
pubmed: 12785463
Scand J Public Health. 2002;30(2):81-5
pubmed: 12028856
BMC Med. 2017 Jul 31;15(1):143
pubmed: 28756776
Acad Emerg Med. 2004 Feb;11(2):187-92
pubmed: 14759964
JAMA. 2018 Jun 19;319(23):2388-2400
pubmed: 29922828
Psychol Med. 2008 Jan;38(1):15-28
pubmed: 17976249
Br J Psychiatry. 1995 May;166(5):654-9
pubmed: 7620753
Psychol Med. 2015 Jun;45(8):1581-9
pubmed: 25215596
N Engl J Med. 2012 Nov 22;367(21):2006-14
pubmed: 23171097
Eur J Epidemiol. 2009;24(11):659-67
pubmed: 19504049
Clin Psychol Rev. 2016 Apr;45:115-30
pubmed: 26953005
J Anxiety Disord. 2012 Apr;26(3):393-400
pubmed: 22306132
Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2015 Sep;17(3):249-60
pubmed: 26487806
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1976 Jun;33(6):766-71
pubmed: 938196
PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e41280
pubmed: 22911770
BMJ Open. 2015 Jun 22;5(6):e007520
pubmed: 26100027
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2011 Dec;124(6):447-53
pubmed: 21838734
BMC Public Health. 2011 Jun 09;11:450
pubmed: 21658213
Lancet. 2017 Dec 17;388(10063):3048-3059
pubmed: 27349358
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571