Validation of the standardised assessment of personality – abbreviated scale in a general population sample. (27th August 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fok, Marcella Lei‐Yee; Seegobin, Seth; Frissa, Souci; Hatch, Stephani L.; Hotopf, Matthew; Hayes, Richard D.; Moran, Paul
• Is Part Of: Personality and mental health. Volume 9:Number 4(2015:Nov.)
• Page Start: 250
• Page End: 257
• Publication Date: 2015-08-27
• Subjects: Personality disorders -- Periodicals; 616.8581005
• DOI: 10.1002/pmh.1307
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1932-8621

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title>Abstract</title> <sec id="pmh1307-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Background</title> <p>Personality disorder (PD) is associated with important health outcomes in the general population. However, the length of diagnostic interviews poses a significant barrier to obtaining large scale, population‐based data on PD. A brief screen for the identification of people at high risk of PD in the general population could be extremely valuable for both clinicians and researchers.</p> </sec> <sec id="pmh1307-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Aim</title> <p>We set out to validate the Standardised Assessment of Personality – Abbreviated Scale (SAPAS), in a general population sample, using the Structured Clinical Interviews for DSM‐IV Personality Disorders (SCID‐II) as a gold standard.</p> </sec> <sec id="pmh1307-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Method</title> <p>One hundred and ten randomly selected, community‐dwelling adults were administered the SAPAS screening interview. The SCID‐II was subsequently administered by a clinical interviewer blind to the initial SAPAS score. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to assess the discriminatory performance of the SAPAS, relative to the SCID‐II.</p> </sec> <sec id="pmh1307-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>Area under the curve for the SAPAS was 0.70 (95% CI = 0.60 to 0.80; <italic>p</italic> < 0.001), indicating moderate overall discriminatory accuracy. A cut point score of 4 on the SAPAS correctly classified 58% of participants. At this cut point, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.69 and 0.53 respectively.</p> </sec> <sec id="pmh1307-sec-0005" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusion</title> <p>The SAPAS operates less efficiently as a screen in general population samples and is probably most usefully applied in clinical populations. © 2015 The Authors Personality and Mental Health published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd</p> </sec> </abstract>