Rethinking the Subjective Units of Distress Scale: Validity and Clinical Utility of the SUDS.

IF 1.7 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Elizabeth Mattera, Brian Zaboski
{"title":"Rethinking the Subjective Units of Distress Scale: Validity and Clinical Utility of the SUDS.","authors":"Elizabeth Mattera, Brian Zaboski","doi":"10.3390/clinpract15070123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Subjective Units of Distress Scale (SUDS) is a widely used self-report measure clinicians rely on during exposure and response prevention (ERP) to monitor progress, guide exposure pacing, and assess intervention efficacy. However, despite its ubiquity in clinical and research settings, foundational investigations of its psychometrics are often atheoretical, fail to evaluate its longitudinal properties, and lack a rigorous construct validation framework. This paper addresses these shortcomings by evaluating the SUDS as a measure of state negative affective intensity using the Strong Program of Construct Validation. Our evaluation demonstrates that the SUDS suffers from significant psychometric weaknesses, including construct underrepresentation, construct irrelevance, poorly defined measurement occasions, and structural limitations, challenging its validity as a precise measure of subjective distress. These limitations have crucial implications for clinical practice, potentially leading to misinterpretations of patient distress and compromising treatment decisions. We discuss these clinical implications, highlight them with a brief clinical vignette, outline a research roadmap for potential improvement using modern psychometric methods, and provide practical recommendations for clinicians currently using the SUDS. Given these validity concerns, caution is warranted when interpreting SUDS scores in both clinical and research contexts until its psychometric properties are more robustly established and understood.</p>","PeriodicalId":45306,"journal":{"name":"Clinics and Practice","volume":"15 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/clinpract15070123","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Subjective Units of Distress Scale (SUDS) is a widely used self-report measure clinicians rely on during exposure and response prevention (ERP) to monitor progress, guide exposure pacing, and assess intervention efficacy. However, despite its ubiquity in clinical and research settings, foundational investigations of its psychometrics are often atheoretical, fail to evaluate its longitudinal properties, and lack a rigorous construct validation framework. This paper addresses these shortcomings by evaluating the SUDS as a measure of state negative affective intensity using the Strong Program of Construct Validation. Our evaluation demonstrates that the SUDS suffers from significant psychometric weaknesses, including construct underrepresentation, construct irrelevance, poorly defined measurement occasions, and structural limitations, challenging its validity as a precise measure of subjective distress. These limitations have crucial implications for clinical practice, potentially leading to misinterpretations of patient distress and compromising treatment decisions. We discuss these clinical implications, highlight them with a brief clinical vignette, outline a research roadmap for potential improvement using modern psychometric methods, and provide practical recommendations for clinicians currently using the SUDS. Given these validity concerns, caution is warranted when interpreting SUDS scores in both clinical and research contexts until its psychometric properties are more robustly established and understood.

重新思考痛苦量表的主观单位:SUDS的有效性和临床应用。
主观痛苦量表(SUDS)是临床医生在暴露和反应预防(ERP)过程中广泛使用的自我报告测量方法,用于监测进展、指导暴露节奏和评估干预效果。然而,尽管它在临床和研究环境中无处不在,但其心理测量学的基础研究往往是理论性的,无法评估其纵向特性,并且缺乏严格的结构验证框架。本文通过使用结构验证的强程序来评估SUDS作为状态负情感强度的测量来解决这些缺点。我们的评估表明,SUDS存在显著的心理测量弱点,包括构念代表性不足、构念不相关、测量场合定义不明确和结构限制,挑战了其作为主观痛苦精确测量的有效性。这些限制对临床实践具有至关重要的意义,可能导致对患者痛苦的误解和损害治疗决策。我们讨论了这些临床意义,用简短的临床小品强调了它们,概述了使用现代心理测量方法进行潜在改进的研究路线图,并为目前使用SUDS的临床医生提供了实用建议。考虑到这些有效性问题,在临床和研究背景下解释SUDS评分时,需要谨慎,直到其心理测量特性得到更牢固的建立和理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinics and Practice
Clinics and Practice MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
91
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信