Cited by 50Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The UCLA hoarding severity scale: Development and validation

Open access
Saxena, Sanjaya, Ayers, Catherine R., Dozier, Mary E., Maidment, Karron M.·2015·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background Effective management of Hoarding Disorder (HD) must begin with assessment of the severity of hoarding symptoms and functional impairment. We sought to validate the UCLA Hoarding Severity Scale (UHSS), a semi-structured, clinician-administered rating scale that measures the severity of both the core symptoms of HD and the associated features of indecisiveness, perfectionism, task prolongation, and procrastination, which are significantly associated with the diagnosis and impairment of HD.Methods Hoarding symptom severity was measured in 62 patients who met DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for HD and 65 normal controls, using the UHSS and the Saving Inventory-Revised (SI-R), a well validated self-report measure of hoarding symptoms.Results The UHSS showed significant internal consistency (Cronbach׳s α=.70). Principal components analysis revealed three factors that accounted for 58% of the variance: 1) associated features and functional impairment, 2) clutter volume and social impairment, and 3) difficulty discarding, urges to save, and excessive acquisition. UHSS and SI-R scores were significantly correlated. UHSS and SI-R total and factor scores of HD patients were all significantly different from those of controls.Limitations Inter-rater and test-retest reliability were not assessed. The initial version of the UHSS did not contain rater instructions, so it lacked quantifiable anchor points for ratings.Conclusions The UHSS showed internal consistency, construct validity, convergent validity, and known groups discriminant validity. The UHSS validly measures the core symptoms, associated features, and functional impairment of patients with HD. Utilizing a valid clinician-administered scale will provide a more comprehensive and accurate clinical assessment of patients with HD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2015.01.030

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • All participants met DSM-5 criteria for hoarding disorder, established by clinical interview and scores on the UHSS and SI-R.

    “All participants were required to meet DSM-5 criteria for HD, determined using a clinical interview in conjunction with scores on the UCLA Hoarding Severity Scale (UHSS; Saxena, Ayers, Dozier, & Maidment, 2015), a 10-items clinician-administered assessment, and on the Savings Inventory- Revised (SI-R; Frost et al., 2004), a 23-item self-report measure.”

    From Intolerance of uncertainty in hoarding disorder (2019) · cites this paper as Saxena, Ayers, Dozier, & Maidment, 2015

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saxena, S., Ayers, C. R., Dozier, M. E., & Maidment, K. M.
Affiliations
  • UC San Diego Health System (US)
  • VA San Diego Healthcare System (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Saxena, Sanjaya
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-04
Volume
175
Pages
488-493
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2157626445
Cited by
50
References
49
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
10.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (CSRD-068-10S)
  • International OCD Foundation
  • Clinical Science Research and Development
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH069433)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
hoarding disorder, symptom severity assessment, functional disability, scale development, construct validity, convergent validity, internal consistency, clutter, indecision, procrastination, perfectionism
MeSH terms
Hoarding Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results, Case-Control Studies, Self Report, Symptom Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review