Juan Antonio Amador-Campos1, Juana Gómez-Benito2, Josep Antoni Ramos-Quiroga3. 1. Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior (IR3C), University of Barcelona, Spain jamador@ub.edu. 2. Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior (IR3C), University of Barcelona, Spain. 3. Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain Biomedical Network Research Centre on Mental Health (CIBERSAM), Barcelona, Spain Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To validate the Catalan adaptation of the Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scales (CAARS), short version (self-report: CAARS-S:S; observer: CAARS-O:S). METHOD: A community sample of 424 adults responded to the two forms. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the dimensional structure. RESULTS: The hypothesized four-factor model (Inattention/Memory Problems, Hyperactivity/Restlessness, Impulsivity/Emotional Lability, and Problems With Self-Concept) presented an adequate fit for the self-report and observer forms. Reliability was slightly higher for the CAARS-O:S (average α = .78) than for the CAARS-S:S (average α = .75). Test-retest average correlations were r = .80 (self-reports) and r = .73 (observer ratings). Informant agreement was high at test (average r = .59) and retest (average r = .61). There were significant gender and age differences. CONCLUSION: This adaptation of the two short forms of the CAARS-S presents adequate evidence of validity and reliability, and it can therefore be used for diagnostic purposes and cross-cultural comparisons.
OBJECTIVE: To validate the Catalan adaptation of the Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scales (CAARS), short version (self-report: CAARS-S:S; observer: CAARS-O:S). METHOD: A community sample of 424 adults responded to the two forms. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the dimensional structure. RESULTS: The hypothesized four-factor model (Inattention/Memory Problems, Hyperactivity/Restlessness, Impulsivity/Emotional Lability, and Problems With Self-Concept) presented an adequate fit for the self-report and observer forms. Reliability was slightly higher for the CAARS-O:S (average α = .78) than for the CAARS-S:S (average α = .75). Test-retest average correlations were r = .80 (self-reports) and r = .73 (observer ratings). Informant agreement was high at test (average r = .59) and retest (average r = .61). There were significant gender and age differences. CONCLUSION: This adaptation of the two short forms of the CAARS-S presents adequate evidence of validity and reliability, and it can therefore be used for diagnostic purposes and cross-cultural comparisons.
Authors: Lenard A Adler; Stephen V Faraone; Thomas J Spencer; Patricia Berglund; Samuel Alperin; Ronald C Kessler Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2017-02-17 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Pablo Luis Lopez; Fernando Manuel Torrente; Agustín Ciapponi; Alicia Graciela Lischinsky; Marcelo Cetkovich-Bakmas; Juan Ignacio Rojas; Marina Romano; Facundo F Manes Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-03-23