Mirko Uljarević1,2, Amanda L Richdale1,2, Helen McConachie3, Darren Hedley1, Ru Ying Cai1,2, Hannah Merrick3, Jeremy R Parr4, Ann Le Couteur3,5. 1. Olga Tennison Autism Research Centre, School of Psychological Science, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. Cooperative Research Centre for Living with Autism (Autism CRC), Long Pocket, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 3. Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. 4. Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. 5. Complex Neurodevelopmental Disorders Service, Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Abstract
Despite the high frequency of anxiety and depression symptoms in individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and a significant impact of these comorbidities on both individuals with ASD and their families, research on the validity of anxiety and depression measures in the ASD population is currently lacking. The aim of this study was to explore the psychometric properties of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS; Zigmond & Snaith, ] in a sample of older adolescents and young adults with ASD. One hundred and fifty one participants (UK Transition longitudinal study: N = 106; 75 males, Mage = 16.04 years, SD = 1.28; Longitudinal Study of Australian Schools Leavers with ASD: N = 45, 30 males; Mage = 18.35 years, SD = 2.55) completed the HADS and a range of mental health and well-being measures. Combination of the Principal Component Analysis and Parallel Analysis indicated two factors as an optimal solution in our sample, accounting for 43.77% of variance with factors being identical in terms of content with the structure found in the general population. Internal consistency was good for the HADS anxiety scale (HADS-A; .82-.84) and acceptable for the HADS depression scale (HADS-D; .60-.72). Convergent validity of both HADS-A and HADS-D scales was excellent and divergent validity was acceptable. Our study represents a significant contribution to the literature by providing an initial validation of the HADS in older adolescents and younger adults with ASD. Autism Res 2018, 11: 258-269.
Despite the high frequency of anxiety and depression symptoms in individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and a significant impact of these comorbidities on both individuals with ASD and their families, research on the validity of anxiety and depression measures in the ASD population is currently lacking. The aim of this study was to explore the psychometric properties of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS; Zigmond & Snaith, ] in a sample of older adolescents and young adults with ASD. One hundred and fifty one participants (UK Transition longitudinal study: N = 106; 75 males, Mage = 16.04 years, SD = 1.28; Longitudinal Study of Australian Schools Leavers with ASD: N = 45, 30 males; Mage = 18.35 years, SD = 2.55) completed the HADS and a range of mental health and well-being measures. Combination of the Principal Component Analysis and Parallel Analysis indicated two factors as an optimal solution in our sample, accounting for 43.77% of variance with factors being identical in terms of content with the structure found in the general population. Internal consistency was good for the HADS anxiety scale (HADS-A; .82-.84) and acceptable for the HADS depression scale (HADS-D; .60-.72). Convergent validity of both HADS-A and HADS-D scales was excellent and divergent validity was acceptable. Our study represents a significant contribution to the literature by providing an initial validation of the HADS in older adolescents and younger adults with ASD. Autism Res 2018, 11: 258-269.
Authors: Ailsa Russell; Daisy Gaunt; Kate Cooper; Jeremy Horwood; Stephen Barton; Ian Ensum; Barry Ingham; Jeremy Parr; Chris Metcalfe; Dheeraj Rai; David Kessler; Nicola Wiles Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Jeremy R Parr; Samuel Brice; Patrick Welsh; Barry Ingham; Ann Le Couteur; Gemma Evans; Alexander Monaco; Mark Freeston; Jacqui Rodgers Journal: Trials Date: 2020-03-14 Impact factor: 2.279