Anselm B M Fuermaier, Lara Tucha, Thomas Merten, Maryam Fathollah Gol, Oliver Tucha
{"title":"临床诊断为多动症的成人症状有效性测试：康纳成人多动症评定量表 (CAARS) 与症状自评量表 (SRSI) 的比较。","authors":"Anselm B M Fuermaier, Lara Tucha, Thomas Merten, Maryam Fathollah Gol, Oliver Tucha","doi":"10.1080/13803395.2024.2411365","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Compared to the number of performance validity measures, the range of available symptom validity measures is limited. The Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI) is a recently developed freestanding symptom validity test with promising psychometric characteristics for use on non-criminal forensic and a range of clinical populations. The goal of this study was to evaluate the utility of the SRSI for symptom validity testing in the clinical evaluation of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This analogue study compared 76 German patients diagnosed with ADHD (age range 19-63 years) with typically developing individuals from the Netherlands/Germany who were assigned to either a control group (<i>N</i> = 58; age range 18-73 years) or a simulation group (<i>N</i> = 46; age range 18-57 years). All participants completed the Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS) with its two embedded validity indicators Infrequency Index (CII) and ADHD Credibility Index (ACI), the SRSI, and the Digit Span (to derive the Reliable Digit Span).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Specificity in controls was perfect for the CAARS, but reached only about 90% for the SRSI. In contrast, sensitivity in experimental simulators ranged from 24% to 65% for the CAARS, but reached high rates of 69% to 82% for the SRSI. In the sample of patients with ADHD, the failure rate ranged from 8% to 34% (CAARS), and 33% to 47% (SRSI). Further, we found limited classification agreement between the validity measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The divergent results on the different validity indicators reflects the ongoing discussion on poor construct unity and clarity, and calls for more research addressing the heterogeneous construct. The utility of the SRSI to reliably distinguish between valid and invalid symptom report in the clinical evaluation of adult ADHD has to be investigated by more refined studies including both symptom and performance validity indicators.</p>","PeriodicalId":15382,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"693-706"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Symptom validity testing in adults with clinically diagnosed ADHD: comparison of the Conner's Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS) and the Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI).\",\"authors\":\"Anselm B M Fuermaier, Lara Tucha, Thomas Merten, Maryam Fathollah Gol, Oliver Tucha\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13803395.2024.2411365\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Compared to the number of performance validity measures, the range of available symptom validity measures is limited. The Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI) is a recently developed freestanding symptom validity test with promising psychometric characteristics for use on non-criminal forensic and a range of clinical populations. The goal of this study was to evaluate the utility of the SRSI for symptom validity testing in the clinical evaluation of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This analogue study compared 76 German patients diagnosed with ADHD (age range 19-63 years) with typically developing individuals from the Netherlands/Germany who were assigned to either a control group (<i>N</i> = 58; age range 18-73 years) or a simulation group (<i>N</i> = 46; age range 18-57 years). All participants completed the Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS) with its two embedded validity indicators Infrequency Index (CII) and ADHD Credibility Index (ACI), the SRSI, and the Digit Span (to derive the Reliable Digit Span).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Specificity in controls was perfect for the CAARS, but reached only about 90% for the SRSI. In contrast, sensitivity in experimental simulators ranged from 24% to 65% for the CAARS, but reached high rates of 69% to 82% for the SRSI. In the sample of patients with ADHD, the failure rate ranged from 8% to 34% (CAARS), and 33% to 47% (SRSI). Further, we found limited classification agreement between the validity measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The divergent results on the different validity indicators reflects the ongoing discussion on poor construct unity and clarity, and calls for more research addressing the heterogeneous construct. The utility of the SRSI to reliably distinguish between valid and invalid symptom report in the clinical evaluation of adult ADHD has to be investigated by more refined studies including both symptom and performance validity indicators.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"693-706\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2024.2411365\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2024.2411365","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Symptom validity testing in adults with clinically diagnosed ADHD: comparison of the Conner's Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS) and the Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI).
Objectives: Compared to the number of performance validity measures, the range of available symptom validity measures is limited. The Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI) is a recently developed freestanding symptom validity test with promising psychometric characteristics for use on non-criminal forensic and a range of clinical populations. The goal of this study was to evaluate the utility of the SRSI for symptom validity testing in the clinical evaluation of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
Methods: This analogue study compared 76 German patients diagnosed with ADHD (age range 19-63 years) with typically developing individuals from the Netherlands/Germany who were assigned to either a control group (N = 58; age range 18-73 years) or a simulation group (N = 46; age range 18-57 years). All participants completed the Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS) with its two embedded validity indicators Infrequency Index (CII) and ADHD Credibility Index (ACI), the SRSI, and the Digit Span (to derive the Reliable Digit Span).
Results: Specificity in controls was perfect for the CAARS, but reached only about 90% for the SRSI. In contrast, sensitivity in experimental simulators ranged from 24% to 65% for the CAARS, but reached high rates of 69% to 82% for the SRSI. In the sample of patients with ADHD, the failure rate ranged from 8% to 34% (CAARS), and 33% to 47% (SRSI). Further, we found limited classification agreement between the validity measures.
Conclusion: The divergent results on the different validity indicators reflects the ongoing discussion on poor construct unity and clarity, and calls for more research addressing the heterogeneous construct. The utility of the SRSI to reliably distinguish between valid and invalid symptom report in the clinical evaluation of adult ADHD has to be investigated by more refined studies including both symptom and performance validity indicators.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology ( JCEN) publishes research on the neuropsychological consequences of brain disease, disorders, and dysfunction, and aims to promote the integration of theories, methods, and research findings in clinical and experimental neuropsychology. The primary emphasis of JCEN is to publish original empirical research pertaining to brain-behavior relationships and neuropsychological manifestations of brain disease. Theoretical and methodological papers, critical reviews of content areas, and theoretically-relevant case studies are also welcome.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
