Cited by 47Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Psychometric evaluation of the Amphetamine Cessation Symptom Assessment

McGregor, Catherine, Srisurapanont, Manit, Mitchell, Amanda, Longo, Marie C., Cahill, Sharon, White, Jason M.·2008·Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment

Abstract

Testing of a new scale, the Amphetamine Cessation Symptom Assessment (ACSA), in a sample of treatment-seeking amphetamine users (N = 133) showed satisfactory reliability, while factor analysis identified three components explaining 64.7% of the variance in scores. Scores were inversely related to subjective general well-being (r = -.33, p < .01) and directly related to the Beck Depression Inventory (r = .59, p < .01). There were positive relationships between the ACSA and measures of amphetamine dependence (r = .36, p < .01) and the intensity of recent amphetamine use (r = .24, p < .01). The ACSA discriminated between "low-dose" and "high-dose" users, indicating discriminant validity. In inpatients (n = 63), ACSA scores declined significantly over time, while higher scores in inpatient treatment dropouts indicated predictive validity. The ACSA showed satisfactory reliability and validity, with a three-factor solution providing the best fit to the data. The ACSA could play an important role in providing clinical outcome data, particularly in outcome evaluation of new treatment protocols.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsat.2007.05.007

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGregor, C., Srisurapanont, M., Mitchell, A., Longo, M. C., Cahill, S., & White, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Government of Western Australia Department of Health (AU)
  • Chiang Mai University (TH)
  • The University of Adelaide (AU)
Venue
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-06
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
443-449
ISSN
0740-5472 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2107194409
Cited by
47
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Government of South Australia
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
amphetamine dependence, withdrawal symptoms, scale validation, psychometric properties, depression, well-being, treatment discontinuation, inpatient care, treatment outcome assessment
MeSH terms
Adult, Amphetamine, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Substance-Related Disorders, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

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