Effects of Patient Gender on Clinicians' Diagnostic Assessment of Youth Disruptive Mood and Behavior.

IF 4.2 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Shannon Shaughnessy, Jared W Keeley, Michael C Roberts, Jeffrey D Burke, Geoffrey M Reed, Spencer C Evans
{"title":"Effects of Patient Gender on Clinicians' Diagnostic Assessment of Youth Disruptive Mood and Behavior.","authors":"Shannon Shaughnessy, Jared W Keeley, Michael C Roberts, Jeffrey D Burke, Geoffrey M Reed, Spencer C Evans","doi":"10.1080/15374416.2024.2432319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Youth disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs) have a male preponderance, but the extent to which gender biases in clinical assessment influence this imbalance remains unclear. The present study investigates whether a child patient's gender affects clinicians' diagnostic decision-making regarding Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD), Conduct Dissocial Disorder (CDD), and Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Clinicians (<i>N</i> = 403; 57.1% male; <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 48.96 years, <i>SD</i> = 11.09) participated in a global ICD-11 field study. Following an experimental design, participants were asked to use ICD-10 or ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines to evaluate two clinical case vignettes, randomly manipulating the patients' gender (boy, girl) and symptom presentation (ODD-Defiant, ODD-Irritable, CDD, IED). Analyses tested whether clinicians' diagnostic accuracy and perceptions of impairment and severity were affected by the patient's gender.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, clinicians identified the correct diagnosis 64.7% of the time. Patient gender was not associated with clinicians' diagnostic accuracy (<i>ps</i>= .090-.895, |φs| = 0.01-0.18) or severity or impairment ratings (<i>p</i>s = .079-.404, |<i>d</i>s| = 0.04-0.19). This pattern of nonsignificant differences and negligible/small effect sizes was consistent across all clinical presentations and analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found no evidence of an association between patient gender, diagnostic accuracy, or perceived severity or impairment when assessing youth DBDs in the present study. Results suggest that diagnostic judgments may be driven by clinical presentation rather than gender and that the male DBD preponderance may not be due to gender diagnostic biases. Further research is needed to replicate these findings among youths in clinical settings, with diverse gender identities, and with other mental health conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48350,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2024.2432319","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Youth disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs) have a male preponderance, but the extent to which gender biases in clinical assessment influence this imbalance remains unclear. The present study investigates whether a child patient's gender affects clinicians' diagnostic decision-making regarding Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD), Conduct Dissocial Disorder (CDD), and Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED).

Method: Clinicians (N = 403; 57.1% male; Mage = 48.96 years, SD = 11.09) participated in a global ICD-11 field study. Following an experimental design, participants were asked to use ICD-10 or ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines to evaluate two clinical case vignettes, randomly manipulating the patients' gender (boy, girl) and symptom presentation (ODD-Defiant, ODD-Irritable, CDD, IED). Analyses tested whether clinicians' diagnostic accuracy and perceptions of impairment and severity were affected by the patient's gender.

Results: Overall, clinicians identified the correct diagnosis 64.7% of the time. Patient gender was not associated with clinicians' diagnostic accuracy (ps= .090-.895, |φs| = 0.01-0.18) or severity or impairment ratings (ps = .079-.404, |ds| = 0.04-0.19). This pattern of nonsignificant differences and negligible/small effect sizes was consistent across all clinical presentations and analyses.

Conclusions: We found no evidence of an association between patient gender, diagnostic accuracy, or perceived severity or impairment when assessing youth DBDs in the present study. Results suggest that diagnostic judgments may be driven by clinical presentation rather than gender and that the male DBD preponderance may not be due to gender diagnostic biases. Further research is needed to replicate these findings among youths in clinical settings, with diverse gender identities, and with other mental health conditions.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (JCCAP) is the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association. It publishes original contributions on the following topics: (a) the development and evaluation of assessment and intervention techniques for use with clinical child and adolescent populations; (b) the development and maintenance of clinical child and adolescent problems; (c) cross-cultural and sociodemographic issues that have a clear bearing on clinical child and adolescent psychology in terms of theory, research, or practice; and (d) training and professional practice in clinical child and adolescent psychology, as well as child advocacy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信