Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychiatric University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Neuroscience Center Zurich, University of Zurich and ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2021 May;31(4):279-287. doi: 10.1089/cap.2020.0116. Epub 2020 Dec 29.
Severity ratings of psychopathology in minors are often based on a composite score of the parent's and child's reports. However, parent's and child's reports often differ substantially, resulting in the integration method affecting the final scores. Nevertheless, effects of integration algorithms are seldom assessed and poorly understood. The dataset is derived from the Treatment for Adolescents with Depression Study (TADS) and consists of 439 adolescents, 54% female, with a Major Depressive Disorder. The interviewer conducted the clinical interview Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) with the parent and the adolescent and the TADS manual advised the interviewer to use the higher score as the final rating unless an informant was judged to be unreliable. Polynomial regressions, multivariate analyses, and mixed models were used to analyze the effects of this integration algorithm on the final scores and associated factors. In 77% of the cases, the interviewer followed the TADS rating rule to use the higher CDRS-R item score. However, the final item scores differed significantly from the rule using the higher value, with the higher score being less often adapted at follow-up assessments and in female patients. The algorithm used to integrate divergent reports affects study outcomes and might introduce data-specific biases. Judgments of the validity and reliability of informants compromise the objectivity of outcomes in major clinical trials by introducing a subjective bias. Therefore, the agreement between children's and parent's reports and the method of integration should routinely be reported in research on pediatric psychopathology. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00006286.
对未成年人精神病理学严重程度的评估通常基于父母和孩子报告的综合得分。然而,父母和孩子的报告往往存在很大差异,这导致整合方法会影响最终得分。尽管如此,整合算法的效果很少被评估,也理解得很差。该数据集源自青少年抑郁症治疗研究(TADS),包括 439 名青少年,其中 54%为女性,患有重度抑郁症。临床访谈员使用儿童抑郁评定量表修订版(CDRS-R)与父母和青少年进行临床访谈,TADS 手册建议访谈员使用较高的分数作为最终评分,除非评估认为信息提供者不可靠。多项式回归、多变量分析和混合模型用于分析这种整合算法对最终评分及其相关因素的影响。在 77%的情况下,访谈员遵循 TADS 评分规则使用较高的 CDRS-R 项目得分。然而,最终项目得分与使用较高值的规则有显著差异,在后续评估和女性患者中,较高的得分不太常见。用于整合分歧报告的算法会影响研究结果,并可能引入特定于数据的偏差。信息提供者的有效性和可靠性判断通过引入主观偏差,损害了重大临床试验结果的客观性。因此,在儿科精神病理学研究中,应定期报告儿童和父母报告之间的一致性以及整合方法。ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00006286。