Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis
Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evi...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Santelmann, Hanno [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2016transfer abstract |
|---|
| Umfang: |
7 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model - Van den Bergh, Omer ELSEVIER, 2021, an international multidisciplinary journal, Amsterdam [u.a.] |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:176 ; year:2016 ; number:2 ; pages:357-363 ; extent:7 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV02989039X |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV02989039X | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230625175807.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 180603s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a GBVA2016015000028.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV02989039X | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0920-9964(16)30328-0 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | |a 610 | |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q DE-600 |
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 150 |q VZ |
| 100 | 1 | |a Santelmann, Hanno |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2016transfer abstract | |
| 300 | |a 7 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. | ||
| 520 | |a Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Franklin, Jeremy |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bußhoff, Jana |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Baethge, Christopher |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Elsevier Science |a Van den Bergh, Omer ELSEVIER |t Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model |d 2021 |d an international multidisciplinary journal |g Amsterdam [u.a.] |w (DE-627)ELV005829860 |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:176 |g year:2016 |g number:2 |g pages:357-363 |g extent:7 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 176 |j 2016 |e 2 |h 357-363 |g 7 | ||
| 953 | |2 045F |a 610 | ||
| author_variant |
h s hs |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
santelmannhannofranklinjeremybuhoffjanab:2016----:nertreibltoshzafcieiodroprdihcioheibplriodrnuioadpe |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2016transfer abstract |
| publishDate |
2016 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 doi GBVA2016015000028.pica (DE-627)ELV02989039X (ELSEVIER)S0920-9964(16)30328-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 610 DE-600 150 VZ Santelmann, Hanno verfasserin aut Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis 2016transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Franklin, Jeremy oth Bußhoff, Jana oth Baethge, Christopher oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Van den Bergh, Omer ELSEVIER Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model 2021 an international multidisciplinary journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV005829860 volume:176 year:2016 number:2 pages:357-363 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U AR 176 2016 2 357-363 7 045F 610 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 doi GBVA2016015000028.pica (DE-627)ELV02989039X (ELSEVIER)S0920-9964(16)30328-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 610 DE-600 150 VZ Santelmann, Hanno verfasserin aut Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis 2016transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Franklin, Jeremy oth Bußhoff, Jana oth Baethge, Christopher oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Van den Bergh, Omer ELSEVIER Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model 2021 an international multidisciplinary journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV005829860 volume:176 year:2016 number:2 pages:357-363 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U AR 176 2016 2 357-363 7 045F 610 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 doi GBVA2016015000028.pica (DE-627)ELV02989039X (ELSEVIER)S0920-9964(16)30328-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 610 DE-600 150 VZ Santelmann, Hanno verfasserin aut Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis 2016transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Franklin, Jeremy oth Bußhoff, Jana oth Baethge, Christopher oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Van den Bergh, Omer ELSEVIER Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model 2021 an international multidisciplinary journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV005829860 volume:176 year:2016 number:2 pages:357-363 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U AR 176 2016 2 357-363 7 045F 610 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 doi GBVA2016015000028.pica (DE-627)ELV02989039X (ELSEVIER)S0920-9964(16)30328-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 610 DE-600 150 VZ Santelmann, Hanno verfasserin aut Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis 2016transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Franklin, Jeremy oth Bußhoff, Jana oth Baethge, Christopher oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Van den Bergh, Omer ELSEVIER Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model 2021 an international multidisciplinary journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV005829860 volume:176 year:2016 number:2 pages:357-363 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U AR 176 2016 2 357-363 7 045F 610 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 doi GBVA2016015000028.pica (DE-627)ELV02989039X (ELSEVIER)S0920-9964(16)30328-0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 610 DE-600 150 VZ Santelmann, Hanno verfasserin aut Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis 2016transfer abstract 7 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. Franklin, Jeremy oth Bußhoff, Jana oth Baethge, Christopher oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Van den Bergh, Omer ELSEVIER Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model 2021 an international multidisciplinary journal Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV005829860 volume:176 year:2016 number:2 pages:357-363 extent:7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U AR 176 2016 2 357-363 7 045F 610 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:176 year:2016 number:2 pages:357-363 extent:7 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:176 year:2016 number:2 pages:357-363 extent:7 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| dewey-raw |
610 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Santelmann, Hanno @@aut@@ Franklin, Jeremy @@oth@@ Bußhoff, Jana @@oth@@ Baethge, Christopher @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2016-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV005829860 |
| dewey-sort |
3610 |
| id |
ELV02989039X |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV02989039X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625175807.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180603s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2016015000028.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV02989039X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0920-9964(16)30328-0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">610</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">150</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Santelmann, Hanno</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Franklin, Jeremy</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bußhoff, Jana</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Baethge, Christopher</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Van den Bergh, Omer ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model</subfield><subfield code="d">2021</subfield><subfield code="d">an international multidisciplinary journal</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV005829860</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:176</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:357-363</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">176</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">357-363</subfield><subfield code="g">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">610</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Santelmann, Hanno |
| spellingShingle |
Santelmann, Hanno ddc 610 ddc 150 Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis |
| authorStr |
Santelmann, Hanno |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV005829860 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health 150 - Psychology |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
610 610 DE-600 150 VZ Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis |
| topic |
ddc 610 ddc 150 |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 ddc 150 |
| topic_browse |
ddc 610 ddc 150 |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
j f jf j b jb c b cb |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV005829860 |
| dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health 150 - Psychology |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV005829860 |
| title |
Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV02989039X (ELSEVIER)S0920-9964(16)30328-0 |
| title_full |
Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis |
| author_sort |
Santelmann, Hanno |
| journal |
Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model |
| journalStr |
Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology 100 - Philosophy & psychology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2016 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
357 |
| author_browse |
Santelmann, Hanno |
| container_volume |
176 |
| physical |
7 |
| class |
610 610 DE-600 150 VZ |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Santelmann, Hanno |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 |
| dewey-full |
610 150 |
| title_sort |
interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_auth |
Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis |
| abstract |
Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. |
| abstractGer |
Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U |
| container_issue |
2 |
| title_short |
Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Franklin, Jeremy Bußhoff, Jana Baethge, Christopher |
| author2Str |
Franklin, Jeremy Bußhoff, Jana Baethge, Christopher |
| ppnlink |
ELV005829860 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T22:38:34.026Z |
| _version_ |
1803871074676375552 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV02989039X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230625175807.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">180603s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">GBVA2016015000028.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV02989039X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0920-9964(16)30328-0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">610</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">150</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Santelmann, Hanno</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder compared with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar depression – A systematic review and meta-analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in clinical practice but its nosological status has been subject to debate ever since it was conceptualized. Although it is key that diagnostic reliability is sufficient, schizoaffective disorder has been reported to have low interrater reliability. Evidence based on systematic review and meta-analysis methods, however, is lacking. Using a highly sensitive literature search in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo we identified studies measuring the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder in comparison to schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and unipolar disorder. Out of 4126 records screened we included 25 studies reporting on 7912 patients diagnosed by different raters. The interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was moderate (meta-analytic estimate of Cohen's kappa 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41–0.73]), and substantially lower than that of its main differential diagnoses (difference in kappa between 0.22 and 0.19). Although there was considerable heterogeneity, analyses revealed that the interrater reliability of schizoaffective disorder was consistently lower in the overwhelming majority of studies. The results remained robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses (e.g., diagnostic manual used) as well as in meta-regressions (e.g., publication year) and analyses of publication bias. Clinically, the results highlight the particular importance of diagnostic re-evaluation in patients diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. They also quantify a widely held clinical impression of lower interrater reliability and agree with earlier meta-analysis reporting low test-retest reliability.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Franklin, Jeremy</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bußhoff, Jana</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Baethge, Christopher</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Van den Bergh, Omer ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance: A Treatment Model</subfield><subfield code="d">2021</subfield><subfield code="d">an international multidisciplinary journal</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV005829860</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:176</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:357-363</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.07.012</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">176</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">357-363</subfield><subfield code="g">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="953" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="2">045F</subfield><subfield code="a">610</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4008236 |