Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • AAPL

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
  • AAPL
  • Alerts
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
OtherREGULAR ARTICLE

The Reliability of Evidence About Psychiatric Diagnosis After Serious Crime: Part I. Agreement Between Experts

Olav Nielssen, Gordon Elliott and Matthew Large
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online December 2010, 38 (4) 516-523;
Olav Nielssen
MB, BS, MCrim
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gordon Elliott
MB, BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthew Large
BSc (Med), MB, BS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

    • View popup
    Table 1

    Agreement About the Psychiatric Diagnosis Between Experts From the Same and Opposite Sides

    Role of the Expert WitnessesAgreeDisagreeKappa95% CI
    PresentAbsent
    Acquired brain injuries
        Same role1255100.6230.400–0.845
        Opposite roles14121120.6530.493–0.814
    Schizophrenia-spectrum psychoses
        Same role214790.7370.514–0.959
        Opposite roles4576260.6300.469–0.791
    Substance-induced psychotic disorder
        Same role224870.7950.572–1.00
        Opposite roles1013340.8190.657–0.980
    Depressive disorders
        Same role659130.3810.154–0.603
        Opposite roles14111220.4760.321–0.630
    Anxiety disorders
        Same role263110.187−0.037–0.411
        Opposite roles2129160.144−0.0138–0.302
    Substance dependence or abuse
        Same role1644170.5140.291–0.737
        Opposite roles4577250.6430.481–0.805
    Intellectual disability
        Same role155570.7510.529–0.974
        Opposite roles2012160.8450.684–1.00
    Personality disorder
        Same role27230.5550.355–0.755
        Opposite roles613470.6070.445–0.768
    Principal Axis I diagnosis
        Same role4217180.4910.281–0.713
        Opposite roles7435380.4530.296–0.609
    Any psychosis*
        Same role244670.8020.578–1.00
        Opposite roles6164220.7020.542–0.862
    • * Diagnoses include schizophrenia-spectrum psychosis, SIPD, psychotic depression, mania, and delirium tremens.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Generalized Estimating Equation Analysis of Factors Associated With Agreement Between Experts About the Principal Axis I Diagnosis

    FactorBSEWald 95% CIHypothesis Test
    LowerUpperWald χ2dfP
    Univariate
        Age−0.0030.0018−0.0060.0012.03510.154
        Male−0.1120.0805−0.2700.0461.93710.164
        Employed−0.0360.0953−0.2230.1510.14310.705
        Married−0.2220.0946−0.408−0.0375.53010.019
        Prior convictions0.0140.0956−0.1730.2020.02210.881
        Homicide matter−0.2740.0871−0.444−0.1039.86710.002
        Same expert role−0.0830.0550−0.1910.0252.29310.130
        Same profession0.0590.0842−0.1060.2240.48510.486
    Multivariate
        Age0.0000.0021−0.0030.0050.22610.635
        Male−0.2030.0904−0.026−0.3815.06910.024
        Employed−0.0170.799−0.1730.1400.04410.834
        Married−0.1890.0995−0.3840.0063.59210.058
        Prior convictions−0.0360.825−0.1980.1260.19110.662
        Homicide matter−0.3040.0775−0.456−0.15215.40210.000
        Same expert role−0.0460.0496−0.1430.0510.86010.356
        Same profession0.1050.0798−0.0510.2621.73710.188
        Intercept−0.3120.14390.0300.5940.469610.030
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online: 38 (4)
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
Vol. 38, Issue 4
December 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in recommending The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law site.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Reliability of Evidence About Psychiatric Diagnosis After Serious Crime: Part I. Agreement Between Experts
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The Reliability of Evidence About Psychiatric Diagnosis After Serious Crime: Part I. Agreement Between Experts
Olav Nielssen, Gordon Elliott, Matthew Large
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Dec 2010, 38 (4) 516-523;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
The Reliability of Evidence About Psychiatric Diagnosis After Serious Crime: Part I. Agreement Between Experts
Olav Nielssen, Gordon Elliott, Matthew Large
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Dec 2010, 38 (4) 516-523;
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • A Forensic Science-Based Model for Identifying and Mitigating Forensic Mental Health Expert Biases
  • Bias in Peer Review of Forensic Psychiatry Publications
  • Reconsidering the Relationship Between Criminal Insanity and Delusions
Show more Regular Article

Similar Articles

Site Navigation

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Information for Authors
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts

Other Resources

  • Academy Website
  • AAPL Meetings
  • AAPL Annual Review Course

Reviewers

  • Peer Reviewers

Other Publications

  • AAPL Practice Guidelines
  • AAPL Newsletter
  • AAPL Ethics Guidelines
  • AAPL Amicus Briefs
  • Landmark Cases

Customer Service

  • Cookie Policy
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Order Physical Copy

Copyright © 2025 by The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law