Schwartz Karen T G, Bowling Amanda A, Dickerson John F, Lynch Frances L, Brent David A, Porta Giovanna, Iyengar Satish, Weersing V Robin
San Diego State University/University of California, San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, 6363 Alvarado Court, Suite 103, San Diego, CA, 92120, USA.
Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA.
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2018 Nov;45(6):944-957. doi: 10.1007/s10488-018-0876-8.
The current study evaluated the interrater reliability of the Child and Adolescent Services Assessment (CASA), a widely used structured interview measuring pediatric mental health service use. Interviews (N = 72) were randomly selected from a pediatric effectiveness trial, and audio was coded by an independent rater. Regressions were employed to identify predictors of rater disagreement. Interrater reliability was high for items (> 94%) and summary metrics (ICC > .79) across service sectors. Predictors of disagreement varied by domain; significant predictors indexed higher clinical severity or social disadvantage. Results support the CASA as a reliable and robust assessment of pediatric service use, but administrators should be alert when assessing vulnerable populations.
本研究评估了儿童与青少年服务评估（CASA）的评分者间信度，CASA是一种广泛使用的用于衡量儿科心理健康服务利用情况的结构化访谈工具。访谈（N = 72）从一项儿科有效性试验中随机选取，音频由一名独立评分者进行编码。采用回归分析来确定评分者意见不一致的预测因素。各服务部门项目（> 94%）和汇总指标（组内相关系数> 0.79）的评分者间信度较高。意见不一致的预测因素因领域而异；显著的预测因素表明临床严重程度较高或社会劣势较大。结果支持将CASA作为对儿科服务利用情况的可靠且有力的评估工具，但管理人员在评估弱势群体时应保持警惕。
