Establishing diagnostic thresholds for adult ADHD screening in taxi drivers: validation of the CAARS-S via Item Response Theory and Machine Learning.

Mehrdad Vossoughi, Zahra Sedaghat, Arash Mani, Seyed Hamdollah Mosavat, Mohammad Salehi-Marzijarani, Ali Akbary, Tahere Manouchehri, Seyed Taghi Heydari, Kamran B Lankarani
{"title":"Establishing diagnostic thresholds for adult ADHD screening in taxi drivers: validation of the CAARS-S via Item Response Theory and Machine Learning.","authors":"Mehrdad Vossoughi, Zahra Sedaghat, Arash Mani, Seyed Hamdollah Mosavat, Mohammad Salehi-Marzijarani, Ali Akbary, Tahere Manouchehri, Seyed Taghi Heydari, Kamran B Lankarani","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is under-recognized in professional drivers, yet it poses significant safety risks. The Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale Short Version (CAARS-S:SV) lacks empirically validated cutoff scores for occupational screening in Iran. This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Persian CAARS-S:SV in taxi drivers and to determine optimal ADHD diagnostic thresholds using both traditional and machine-learning methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sample of 298 male taxi drivers (mean age 36.8 ± 8.9 years) completed the Persian CAARS-S:SV. Internal consistency was evaluated with Cronbach's α, and construct validity was tested via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The dataset was randomly split into training (n = 198) and test (n = 100) subsets. Diagnostic thresholds were derived using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, item response theory (IRT; Terluin et al. method), logistic regression, and Random Forest (RF) modeling. Performance metrics-sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value-were computed on the test set.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cronbach's α coefficients ranged from 0.72 (Subscale A) to 0.89 (total score), and CFA fit indices supported the three-factor structure (χ2/df = 2.40, RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.91). ADHD prevalence was 20.8% (n = 62). ROC and RF methods identified optimal total-score cutoffs yielding sensitivity = 88% and specificity = 86.7%. For Subscale D, ROC achieved sensitivity = 96% and specificity = 76%, while RF achieved sensitivity = 92% and specificity = 85.3%. However, RF resulted in lower error value to diagnose the status of ADHD in the participants. IRT, ROC, and RF matched for subscales A, B, and C but produced an unacceptably low sensitivity (68%) for the total score (threshold = 24), reflecting a violation of IRT's unidimensionality assumption. Logistic regression performed less favorably (sensitivity 16%-60%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Persian CAARS-S:SV is a reliable and valid instrument for ADHD screening in Iranian taxi drivers. ROC curve and Random Forest methods yielded the most accurate cutoff scores, particularly for the overall scale and dimension D. These empirically derived thresholds can enhance early identification of adult ADHD in occupational health settings and support the development of data-driven screening protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":73795,"journal":{"name":"Journal of injury & violence research","volume":"18 1","pages":"None"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of injury & violence research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is under-recognized in professional drivers, yet it poses significant safety risks. The Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale Short Version (CAARS-S:SV) lacks empirically validated cutoff scores for occupational screening in Iran. This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Persian CAARS-S:SV in taxi drivers and to determine optimal ADHD diagnostic thresholds using both traditional and machine-learning methods.

Methods: A sample of 298 male taxi drivers (mean age 36.8 ± 8.9 years) completed the Persian CAARS-S:SV. Internal consistency was evaluated with Cronbach's α, and construct validity was tested via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The dataset was randomly split into training (n = 198) and test (n = 100) subsets. Diagnostic thresholds were derived using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, item response theory (IRT; Terluin et al. method), logistic regression, and Random Forest (RF) modeling. Performance metrics-sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value-were computed on the test set.

Results: Cronbach's α coefficients ranged from 0.72 (Subscale A) to 0.89 (total score), and CFA fit indices supported the three-factor structure (χ2/df = 2.40, RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.91). ADHD prevalence was 20.8% (n = 62). ROC and RF methods identified optimal total-score cutoffs yielding sensitivity = 88% and specificity = 86.7%. For Subscale D, ROC achieved sensitivity = 96% and specificity = 76%, while RF achieved sensitivity = 92% and specificity = 85.3%. However, RF resulted in lower error value to diagnose the status of ADHD in the participants. IRT, ROC, and RF matched for subscales A, B, and C but produced an unacceptably low sensitivity (68%) for the total score (threshold = 24), reflecting a violation of IRT's unidimensionality assumption. Logistic regression performed less favorably (sensitivity 16%-60%).

Conclusions: The Persian CAARS-S:SV is a reliable and valid instrument for ADHD screening in Iranian taxi drivers. ROC curve and Random Forest methods yielded the most accurate cutoff scores, particularly for the overall scale and dimension D. These empirically derived thresholds can enhance early identification of adult ADHD in occupational health settings and support the development of data-driven screening protocols.

建立出租车司机成人ADHD筛查的诊断阈值:基于项目反应理论和机器学习的CAARS-S的验证。
背景:成人注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)在职业司机中未被充分认识,但它带来了重大的安全风险。康纳斯成人ADHD评定量表短版(CAARS-S:SV)缺乏经验验证的截断分数用于伊朗的职业筛查。本研究旨在评估出租车司机的波斯CAARS-S:SV的心理测量特性,并使用传统和机器学习方法确定最佳的ADHD诊断阈值。方法:对298名男性出租车司机(平均年龄36.8±8.9岁)进行波斯CAARS-S:SV调查。采用Cronbach’s α评价内部一致性,采用验证性因子分析(CFA)检验结构效度。数据集被随机分成训练子集(n = 198)和测试子集(n = 100)。诊断阈值采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析、项目反应理论(IRT; Terluin等人的方法)、逻辑回归和随机森林(RF)模型推导。在测试集上计算性能指标——敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值。结果:Cronbach's α系数范围为0.72(子量表A) ~ 0.89(总分),CFA拟合指数支持三因素结构(χ2/df = 2.40, RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.91)。ADHD患病率为20.8% (n = 62)。ROC和RF方法确定了最佳总分截止点,灵敏度为88%,特异性为86.7%。对于子量表D, ROC灵敏度为96%,特异性为76%,RF灵敏度为92%,特异性为85.3%。然而,射频导致较低的误差值诊断ADHD状态的参与者。IRT、ROC和RF在子量表A、B和C上匹配,但对总分产生了不可接受的低灵敏度(68%)(阈值= 24),这反映了IRT的单维性假设的违反。逻辑回归表现不佳(灵敏度为16%-60%)。结论:波斯语CAARS-S:SV是伊朗出租车司机ADHD筛查的可靠有效工具。ROC曲线和随机森林方法产生了最准确的截止分数,特别是对于总体量表和维度d。这些经验推导的阈值可以增强职业健康环境中成人ADHD的早期识别,并支持数据驱动筛查方案的发展。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书