Carina Capra1,2, David J Kavanagh1, Leanne Hides1, James G Scott3,4. 1. Institute of Health & Biomedical Innovation, School of Psychology & Counselling, Queensland University of Technology, Kevin Grove, Queensland, Australia. 2. Metro South Addiction and Mental Health Service, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia. 3. The University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research (UQCCR), Herston, Queensland, Australia. 4. Metro North Mental Health, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: Psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) are common in young people and are associated with both distress and adverse outcomes. The Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences-Positive Scale (CAPE-P) provides a 20-item measure of lifetime PLEs. A 15-item revision of this scale was recently published (CAPE-P15). Although the CAPE-P has been used to assess PLEs in the last 12 months, there is no version of the CAPE for assessing more recent PLEs (e.g. 3 months). This study aimed to determine the reliability and validity of the current CAPE-P15 and assess its relationship with current distress. METHOD: A cross-sectional online survey of 489 university students (17-25 years) assessed lifetime and current substance use, current distress, and lifetime and 3-month PLEs on the CAPE-P15. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the current CAPE-P15 retained the same three-factor structure as the lifetime version consisting of persecutory ideation, bizarre experiences and perceptual abnormalities. The total score of the current version was lower than the lifetime version, but the two were strongly correlated (r = .64). The current version was highly predictive of generalized distress (r = .52) and indices that combined symptom frequency with associated distress did not confer greater predictive power than frequency alone. CONCLUSION: This study provided preliminary data that the current CAPE-P15 provides a valid and reliable measure of current PLEs. The current CAPE-P15 is likely to have substantial practical utility if it is later shown to be sensitive to change, especially in prevention and early intervention for mental disorders in young people.
AIM: Psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) are common in young people and are associated with both distress and adverse outcomes. The Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences-Positive Scale (CAPE-P) provides a 20-item measure of lifetime PLEs. A 15-item revision of this scale was recently published (CAPE-P15). Although the CAPE-P has been used to assess PLEs in the last 12 months, there is no version of the CAPE for assessing more recent PLEs (e.g. 3 months). This study aimed to determine the reliability and validity of the current CAPE-P15 and assess its relationship with current distress. METHOD: A cross-sectional online survey of 489 university students (17-25 years) assessed lifetime and current substance use, current distress, and lifetime and 3-month PLEs on the CAPE-P15. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the current CAPE-P15 retained the same three-factor structure as the lifetime version consisting of persecutory ideation, bizarre experiences and perceptual abnormalities. The total score of the current version was lower than the lifetime version, but the two were strongly correlated (r = .64). The current version was highly predictive of generalized distress (r = .52) and indices that combined symptom frequency with associated distress did not confer greater predictive power than frequency alone. CONCLUSION: This study provided preliminary data that the current CAPE-P15 provides a valid and reliable measure of current PLEs. The current CAPE-P15 is likely to have substantial practical utility if it is later shown to be sensitive to change, especially in prevention and early intervention for mental disorders in young people.
Authors: Louise Birrell; Nicola C Newton; Tim Slade; Catherine Chapman; Louise Mewton; Nyanda McBride; Leanne Hides; Mary Lou Chatterton; Steve Allsop; Annalise Healy; Marius Mather; Catherine Quinn; Cathrine Mihalopoulos; Maree Teesson Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2018-11-06
Authors: Alexandros Georgiadis; Robbie Duschinsky; Jesus Perez; Peter B Jones; Debra Russo; Clare Knight; Emma Soneson; Mary Dixon-Woods Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-11-08 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Johanna C Badcock; Frank Larøi; Karina Kamp; India Kelsall-Foreman; Romola S Bucks; Michael Weinborn; Marieke Begemann; John-Paul Taylor; Daniel Collerton; John T O'Brien; Mohamad El Haj; Dominic Ffytche; Iris E Sommer Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 9.306