ABSTRACT
Introducción. La fiabilidad de las escalas autoaplicadas retrospectivamente para tamizar a adultos con trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad (TDAH) se ha investigado de manera limitada.Método. Se construyó un instrumento denominado «FASCT», el cual consta de dos versiones: autoaplicada y del observador. Se aplicó la primera versión a un total de 393 personas y la versión del observador a 377. Se realizó un análisis factorial exploratorio y confirmatorio para obtener las versiones finales del instrumento. Finalmente se aplicó la versión autoaplicada junto con una entrevista estructurada a 205 sujetos. La versión del observador fue aplicada a 105 de sus familiares de primer grado.Resultados. La versión autoaplicada obtuvo un alfa de Cronbach de 0,84 y la versión del observador de 0,87. El punto de corte con mejor balance entre sensibilidad y 1-especificidad fue de 23 puntos para cada versión. El coeficiente de correlación entre ambas versiones fue de 0,88. El coeficiente de correlación entre la escala de Wender-UTHA y la versión autoaplicada de la «FASCT» fue de 0,71 y para la versión del observador fue de 0,66. El grado de acuerdo entre la calificación dicotomizada de la «FASCT» con el diagnóstico de la entrevista estructurada fue de 0,82 para la versión autoaplicada y de 0,88 para la versión del observador. Asimismo se obtuvieron los siguientes índices para la versión autoaplicada: sensibilidad, 80,36; especificidad, 97,9. Los valores para la versión del observador fueron: 95,4 y 96,3, respectivamente.Conclusiones. Ambas versiones de la escala «FASCT» demostraron ser válidas y confiables para el tamizaje del TDAH en adultos
Introduction. Research about the reliability of retrospective self-report rating scales for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults has been limited.Method. A self-report scale named «FASCT» was created with two versions: self-reported and observer. The self-reported version was applied to 393 subjects and the observer version to 377. An exploratory and confirmatory factorial analysis was made in order to obtain the final adaptation of both versions. Finally they were applied to 205 subjects and 105 of their first degree relatives.Results. Cronbach's alpha for the self-reported version was 0.84 and 0.87 for the observer version. The total score that had the best balance between sensitivity and 1-specificity was 23 points for each version of the «FASCT». Correlation between both versions was 0.88. The correlation coefficient between the Wender-UTAH scale and self-reported version was 0.71 and for the observer version was 0.66. Agreement degree between dichotomized total score and the diagnosis made by structured interview was 0.82, for the self-reported version and 0.88 for the observer version. Sensitivity and specificity for the self-reported version were 80.36 and 97.9, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity values for the observer version were 95.4 and 96.3 respectively.Conclusions. Both versions of the «FASCT» scale were shown to be valid and reliable for adult ADHD screening
Subject(s)
Male , Female , Adult , Humans , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/diagnosis , Mental Status Schedule/statistics & numerical data , Interview, Psychological/methods , Mass Screening , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/epidemiologyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Research about the reliability of retrospective self-report rating scales for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults has been limited. METHOD: A self-report scale named "FASCT" was created with two versions: self-reported and observer. The self-reported version was applied to 393 subjects and the observer version to 377. An exploratory and confirmatory factorial analysis was made in order to obtain the final adaptation of both versions. Finally they were applied to 205 subjects and 105 of their first degree relatives. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha for the self-reported version was 0.84 and 0.87 for the observer version. The total score that had the best balance between sensitivity and 1-specificity was 23 points for each version of the "FASCT". Correlation between both versions was 0.88. The correlation coefficient between the Wender-UTAH scale and self-reported version was 0.71 and for the observer version was 0.66. Agreement degree between dichotomized total score and the diagnosis made by structured interview was 0.82, for the self-reported version and 0.88 for the observer version. Sensitivity and specificity for the self-reported version were 80.36 and 97.9, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity values for the observer version were 95.4 and 96.3 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both versions of the "FASCT" scale were shown to be valid and reliable for adult ADHD screening.
