Premium
Performance of the CJDATS Co‐Occurring Disorders Screening Instruments (CODSIs) among Minority Offenders
Author(s) -
Duncan Alexandra,
Sacks Stanley,
Melnick Gerald,
Cleland Charles M.,
Pearson Frank S.,
Coen Carrie
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
behavioral sciences and the law
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.649
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1099-0798
pISSN - 0735-3936
DOI - 10.1002/bsl.822
Subject(s) - ethnic group , prison , psychiatry , clinical psychology , substance abuse , mental illness , medicine , african american , psychology , mental health , ethnology , criminology , sociology , anthropology , history
Previous research has shown the performance of the CJDATS Co‐Occurring Disorders Screening Instruments (CODSI‐MD and SMD)—six‐ and three‐item instruments to screen for any mental disorder (CODSI‐MD) and for severe mental disorders (CODSI‐SMD), respectively—to be comparable or superior to other, longer instruments. This study tested the stability of the performance of the CODSI‐MD and SMD across three racial/ethnic groups of offenders entering prison substance abuse treatment programs ( n = 353), consisting of 96 African American, 120 Latino, and 137 White admissions. The Structured Clinical Interview (SCID) was used to obtain DSM‐IV Axis I and II diagnoses; a lifetime SCID diagnosis of a mental disorder or a severe mental disorder was the criterion against which the CODSI‐MD and SMD were validated. Results showed no statistical differences in sensitivity or specificity for either the CODSI‐MD or SMD across the African American, Latino, and White prisoner groups. The value of the CODSI‐MD and SMD as brief screens for mental disorders among offenders with diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds is discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.