Encephale. 2023 Jan 12:S0013-7006(22)00274-3. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2022.11.007. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Three scoring methods for the widely available Adult ADHD Symptoms Rating Scale v1.1 (ASRS) have been proposed to screen for ADHD, but these three methods have rarely been compared against formal clinical diagnoses. We aimed to validate the French version of the ASRS against a clinical interview using DSM-IV and DSM-5 diagnostic algorithms.
METHODS: One hundred five adults from a convenience sample were evaluated with the ASRS and the DIVA 2.0, using both DSM-IV and DSM-5 criteria. We used Confirmatory Factor Analysis to investigate the underlying structure of the ASRS. Sensitivity, specificity, and classification accuracy were compared between the rating algorithms of the ASRS.
RESULTS: The full score method had worse predictive performance than the Screener and the 2-stage scoring method. All characteristics of the three scoring methods for the ASRS were worse when applying DSM-5 criteria. The best-fitting structure was a bi-factor model with a general ADHD factor and three specific factors.
CONCLUSIONS: ADHD was best conceived as a one-dimensional construct. The 2-stage scoring method superseded the Screener with comparable sensitivity and specificity.
PMID:36641267 | DOI:10.1016/j.encep.2022.11.007
