2012

KENNEDY AXIS V: RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY,
INCLUDING COMPARISONS TO AXIS V (GAF), HoNOS, AND THE BPRS

Stelt, A van der, Baars, A van, Mulder, C.L. and Kennedy, J.A.

Published by KennedyMD Publishing October 1, 2012 (www.kennedymd.com)

Page 8: "From these results the conclusion can be drawn that the K Axis is a valid instrument as evidenced by having both convergent and divergent validity."

Page 9: "Overall, the interrater reliability of the K Axis turns out to be classified as very good."

Click Below to View the Full Article:

2010

KENNEDY AXIS V ASSESSMENT IN AN ITALIAN
OUTPATIENT AND INPATIENT POPULATION
English Version Published by KennedyMD Publishing September 1, 2012 (Original Italian Version was published 2010 in Rivista di Psichiatria 45(4):214-20)

Mundo, E., Bonalume, L., Del Corno, F., Madeddu, F., & Lang, M.

Page 11: "This preliminary study indicates that K Axis subscales’ interrater reliability ranges from good to excellent, even if administrated by staff with different psychiatric professional backgrounds, as well as from different many mental health services."

Click Below to View Full Article in English:

Click Below to View Abstract of the Article in English:

2003

Kennedy, JA: Mastering the Kennedy Axis V: A New Psychiatric Assessment of Patient Functioning. Arlington, VA. American Psychiatric Publishing, 2003.

Page 2-29 and 2-32

Reliability and Validity of the Kennedy Axis V was addressed and "...the K Axis has reasonably good reliability. Table 2-1 shows the interrater reliability..."

Click Below to View Details of the Book:

2000

A comparison of the Kennedy Axis V and the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale. Higgins, J and Purvis, K. Journal of Psychiatric Practice. 2000 Mar;6(2):84-90.

Source:
State of California, Department of Mental Health, Sacramento 95814, USA.

Abstract:
"In this article, the authors evaluate two brief clinician-scored global assessment instruments used to measure the functioning of adult clients who have a serious mental illness: the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) Scale and the relatively new Kennedy Axis V (K Axis). Although both instruments are brief and easy to score, the K Axis provides a multi-dimensional evaluation, while the GAF provides a single, unidimensional picture of a client's functioning. Statistical analyses indicated that both instruments have adequate validity and reliability if the clinicians using them are sufficiently trained. Correlations between the two instruments were high where expected. Statistically significant differential functioning was found for various subgroups. The K Axis was better able to pinpoint this specific differential functioning."

Click Below to View the Abstract:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~