PRELIMINARY REPORT |
Division of Epidemiology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
Department of Psychiatry, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
Department of Psychiatry, Cathay General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
Section of Social and Epidemiological Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
Department of Psychiatry, University of Nottingham, UK
Department of Psychiatry, Lo-Tung Poh-Ai Hospital, Lo-Tung, I-Lan, Taiwan
Department of Psychiatry, Washington University, St Louis, Missouri, USA
Department of Psychiatry, Chang Gung University College of Medicine and Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan
Department of Neuropsychiatry, Kai-Suan Psychiatric Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
Division of Epidemiology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
Correspondence: Professor Andrew T. A. Cheng, Division of Epidemiology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan. Fax: 8862 2782 3047; e-mail: bmandrew{at}ccvax.sinica.edu.tw
Declaration of interest This work was supported by a grant from the Taiwan National Health Research Institutes (DD01-861X-MD-601S).
* Results from this study were presented at the XIII Congress of the International Federation of Psychiatric Epidemiology, March 1999, Taipei, Taiwan.
Background There are no published reports of cross-cultural equivalence and interrater reliability at the level of individual symptom items assessed by a semi-structured clinical interview employing operationalised clinician ratings.
Aims To assess the cross-cultural clinical equivalence and reliability of a Chinese version of the World Health Organization Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry (SCAN).
Method UK-US and Taiwanese groups of psychiatrists used Chinese and English transcripts of videotape interviews of Taiwanese patients to discuss cross-cultural issues and ratings of SCAN items. Item ratings were compared quantitatively individually and pooled by SCAN section.
Results Chinese equivalents were found for all SCAN items. No between-group differences were found for most individual items, but there were differences for some scaled items. Average agreement between the two groups was 69-100%.
Conclusions Cross-cultural implementation based on SCAN in Taiwan appears valid.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S.-I Wu, H.-C. Huang, S.-I. Liu, C.-R. Huang, F.-J. Sun, T.-Y. Chang, S.-C. Shih, and K.-S. Jeng Validation and Comparison of Alcohol-Screening Instruments for Identifying Hazardous Drinking in Hospitalized Patients in Taiwan Alcohol Alcohol., September 1, 2008; 43(5): 577 - 582. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. BHUI, S. MOHAMUD, N. WARFA, T. J. CRAIG, and S. A. STANSFELD Cultural adaptation of mental health measures: improving the quality of clinical practice and research The British Journal of Psychiatry, September 1, 2003; 183(3): 184 - 186. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. T. A. CHENG Expressed emotion: a cross-culturally valid concept? The British Journal of Psychiatry, December 1, 2002; 181(6): 466 - 467. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Littlewood and A.T.A. Cheng Culture-specific psychiatric illness? Author's reply The British Journal of Psychiatry, November 1, 2001; 179 (5): 460 - 461. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
A. T. A. CHENG Case definition and culture: are people all the same? The British Journal of Psychiatry, July 1, 2001; 179(1): 1 - 3. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||