RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the psychometric values of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-Revised (GADS-R) which measures the intensity and duration of worry, various coping and avoidance strategies to cope with worrying, and positive and negative metacognitive beliefs about worrying. METHODS: 114 patients with generalized anxiety disorder and 198 healthy controls were included in the study. These patients were diagnosed according to DSM-IV TR, and the primary diagnosis of the patients was generalized anxiety disorder which was confirmed via SCID I and II, subsequently. Sociodemographic form, GADS-R total and subscale scores, and Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 Scale (GAD-7), and Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) were used to assess validity, reliability and cut-off point. RESULTS: GADS-R total and subscale scores and MCQ-30, BDI, BAI, GAD-7, and PSWQ were found to be statistically higher in the patients with GAD compared to a healthy control group. GADS-R has five factors and showed relatively acceptable sensitivity and specificity for detecting anxiety disorders at a cut-off point of 1188. CONCLUSION: The GADS-R is a valid and reliable scale that can be used in the Turkish population as an assessment tool.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 (CAS-1) questionnaire. METHODS: 221 participants were included in the study who do not meet any psychiatric diagnosis. Participants were applied SCID I and II and filled CAS-1 scale, Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) Scale, and Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ). Testing the reliability Cronbach's alpha, item analysis and Item and total score correlation coefficients were applied. For testing structural validity, Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used, and for testing the content validity, the relationship between each item of CAS-1 and MCQ-30, BDI, BAI, GAD-7, PSWQ was examined. RESULTS: The correlation reliability coefficients were statistically significant except for using alcohol/drugs as a coping mechanism. Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of 16 items was 0.771 whereas, this ratio was 0.772 for the first eight items (CAS) and 0.685 for the last eight items (Metacognitive Beliefs) which showed that the internal consistency of CAS-1 was high. Structural and Content Validity of the scale was significant. CONCLUSION: The Turkish version of the CAS-1 was a reliable and valid measure to evaluate CAS in a Turkish population.
