Raul Felipe Palma-Álvarez1, Csaba Barta2, Pieter Jan Carpentier3, Susan Carruthers4, Cleo L Crunelle5, Zsolt Demetrovics6, Geert Dom7, Stephen V Faraone8, Johan Franck9, Brian Johnson10, Máté Kapitány-Fövény11, Sharlene Kaye12, Maija Konstenius9, Frieda Matthys13, Franz Moggi14, Merete Møller15, Arnt Schellekens16, Arvid Skutle17, Geurt van de Glind18, Katelijne van Emmerik-van Oortmerssen19, Sofie Verspreet20, Robert A Schoevers21, Sara Wallhed22, Frances R Levin23, Lara Grau-López1, Miguel Casas1, Wim van den Brink24, Josep Antoni Ramos-Quiroga25. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Psychiatry and Forensic Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 2. Institute of Medical Chemistry, Molecular Biology, Pathobiochemistry, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. 3. Reinier van Arkel mental health institute, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands. 4. National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University, Perth, Australia. 5. Department of Psychiatry, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Brussels, Belgium; Toxicological Center, Antwerp University, Antwerp, Belgium. 6. Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary. 7. Antwerp University (UA), Collaborative Antwerp Psychiatric Research Institute (CAPRI), Antwerp, Belgium; Psychiatric Center Mutiversum, Boechout, Belgium. 8. Departments of Psychiatry and of Neuroscience and Physiology, SUNY Upstate Medical Center, Syracuse, NY, USA. 9. Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 10. Departments of Psychiatry and of Anesthesia, SUNY Upstate Medical Center, Syracuse, NY, USA. 11. Nyírő Gyula National Institute of Psychiatry and Addictions, Budapest, Hungary; Faculty of Health Sciences, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. 12. National Drug and Alcohol Research Center, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 13. Department of Psychiatry, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Brussels, Belgium. 14. University Hospital of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Bern, Switzerland. 15. Department for Substance Abuse Treatment, Østfold Hospital Trust, Norway. 16. Department of Psychiatry, Radboudumc, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior, Nijmegen Institute for Scientist Practitioners in Addiction (NISPA), Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 17. Bergen Clinics Foundation, Bergen, Norway. 18. ICASA Foundation, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 19. Arkin Mental Health and Addiction Treatment Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 20. Psychiatric Center Mutiversum, Boechout, Belgium. 21. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 22. Stockholm Centre for Dependency Disorders, Sweden. 23. Columbia University, the New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA. 24. Amsterdam Institute for Addiction Research, Department of Psychiatry, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 25. Department of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Psychiatry and Forensic Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: jaramos@vhebron.net.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the validity of the ADHD module of the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI-Plus) in patients with substance use disorders (SUD), using the Conners' Adult ADHD Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV (CAADID) as the external criterion. METHOD: A cross sectional international multi-center study in 10 countries was conducted in treatment seeking SUD patients. A sample of 1263 patients with both MINI-Plus and CAADID was analyzed to determine the psychometric properties of the MINI-Plus. RESULTS: According to the CAADID, 179 patients (14.2%) met criteria for adult ADHD, whereas according to the MINI-Plus 227 patients (18.0%) were identified as having adult ADHD. Sensitivity of the MINI-Plus ADHD module was 74%, specificity was 91%, positive predictive value was 60% and negative predictive value was 96%. Kappa was 0.60. CONCLUSION: The MINI-Plus has acceptable criterion validity for the screening of adult ADHD in treatment seeking SUD patients. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: On the basis of the results, The MINI-Plus may be used for the screening of ADHD in SUD patients.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the validity of the ADHD module of the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI-Plus) in patients with substance use disorders (SUD), using the Conners' Adult ADHD Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV (CAADID) as the external criterion. METHOD: A cross sectional international multi-center study in 10 countries was conducted in treatment seeking SUD patients. A sample of 1263 patients with both MINI-Plus and CAADID was analyzed to determine the psychometric properties of the MINI-Plus. RESULTS: According to the CAADID, 179 patients (14.2%) met criteria for adult ADHD, whereas according to the MINI-Plus 227 patients (18.0%) were identified as having adult ADHD. Sensitivity of the MINI-Plus ADHD module was 74%, specificity was 91%, positive predictive value was 60% and negative predictive value was 96%. Kappa was 0.60. CONCLUSION: The MINI-Plus has acceptable criterion validity for the screening of adult ADHD in treatment seeking SUD patients. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: On the basis of the results, The MINI-Plus may be used for the screening of ADHD in SUD patients.