The American Journal of Psychiatry
Journal Home Search Current Issue Past Issues Subscribe All APPI Journals Help Contact Us
 
Quicksearch
Advanced Search
Or Search All APPI Journals
This Article
* Full Text (PDF)
* Alert me when this article is cited
* Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
* Email this article to a Colleague
* Similar articles in this journal
* Similar articles in PubMed
* Alert me to new issues of the journal
* Add to My Articles & Searches
* Download to citation manager
* reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
* Citing Articles via HighWire
* Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
* Articles by Pincus, H. A.
* Articles by Sharfstein, S. S.
* Search for Related Content
PubMed
* PubMed Citation
* Articles by Pincus, H. A.
* Articles by Sharfstein, S. S.

Am J Psychiatry 1991; 148:1037-1043
Copyright © 1991 by American Psychiatric Association


REGULAR ARTICLES

Determining disability due to mental impairment: APA's evaluation of Social Security Administration guidelines

HA Pincus, C Kennedy, SJ Simmens, HH Goldman, P Sirovatka and SS Sharfstein
APA Office of Research, Washington, DC 20005.

OBJECTIVE: APA evaluated the Social Security Administration's (SSA's) medical standards and guidelines for determining disability due to mental impairment to determine how well the standards and guidelines operationalize the statutory definition of disability in a manner consistent with current psychiatric practice. METHOD: Seventy-two psychiatrists were trained in one of two procedures: those in the sequential evaluation condition were trained in the process and forms used by the SSA's reviewing medical consultants, and those in the statutory definition condition were trained in the statutory definition of disability and application of clinical judgment according to this standard. Decisions regarding claimant's ability or inability to work were recorded on an instrument designed for the study. Each condition consisted of 12 panels of three members. They reviewed 732 actual claims for disability benefits. The panelists reviewed claims independently, then rendered panel judgments. Each claim was reviewed by one panel in each condition. RESULTS: The proportion of agreement between conditions for panel decisions (0.77) was higher than chance agreement (kappa = 0.46). The high level of agreement on claims judged to have good medical evidence and on which confident decisions were made (proportion of agreement = 0.96, kappa = 0.78) suggests that disagreements largely reflected ambiguities in application of the standards and guidelines to more complex cases or those with inadequate information. CONCLUSIONS: The SSA's revised medical standards and guidelines reflect clinical decisions about ability to work based on the statute and, with procedural modifications, should be retained. The SSA should be involved in further systematic studies to develop a field of scientific inquiry into disability and psychiatric disorders.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Disability Policy StudiesHome page
B. H. Gross and H. Hahn
Developing Issues in the Classification of Mental and Physical Disabilities
Journal of Disability Policy Studies, January 1, 2004; 15(3): 130 - 134.
[Abstract] [PDF]




Get information about faster international access.

Privacy Policy

Copyright © 1991 American Psychiatric Association. All rights reserved.

Home | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Subscribe | All APPI Journals | Help | Contact Us

American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. American Psychiatric Association
1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1825, Arlington, VA 22209-3901 * 800-368-5777 * appi at psych.org