Cited by 33Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

Diagnostic accuracy of a brief screening tool for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in UK prison inmates

Young, S., González, R. A., Mutch, L., Mallet-Lambert, I., O'Rourke, L., Hickey, N., Asherson, P., Gudjonsson, G. H.·2016·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is overrepresented in prison, making it imperative to identify a screening tool that can be quickly applied to efficiently detect the disorder. We explored the discrimination ability of a widely used ADHD screen, the Barkley Adult ADHD Rating Scale (BAARS-IV), against a clinical diagnostic interview. A brief version of the screen was then developed in order to simplify its use in the prison context, and maximize its diagnostic properties. Method: A cross-sectional study of 390 male prison inmates was performed in the UK, all participants were screened and interviewed via the Diagnostic Interview for ADHD in Adults 2.0 (DIVA-2). Results: A total of 47 (12.1%) inmates screened positive for ADHD using the full BAARS-IV, and 96 (24.6%) were clinically diagnosed, for a sensitivity of 37.9 and a specificity of 96.3. Our models identified the six items that most predicted ADHD diagnosis, with adjusted odds ratios ranging from 2.66 to 4.58. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 0.82, 0.84 and 0.84, respectively, for the developed brief scale, and 0.71, 0.85 and 0.81 for its validation. Weighted probability scores produced an area under the curve of 0.89 for development, and 0.82 for validation of the brief scale. Conclusions: The original BAARS-IV performed poorly at identifying prison inmates with ADHD. Our developed brief scale substantially improved diagnostic accuracy. The brief screening instrument has great potential to be used as an accurate and resource-effective tool to screen young people and adults for likely ADHD in the criminal justice system.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291716000039

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Young, S., González, R. A., Mutch, L., Mallet-Lambert, I., O'Rourke, L., Hickey, N., Asherson, P., & Gudjonsson, G. H.
Affiliations
  • Reykjavík University (IS)
  • University of Puerto Rico System (PR)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Centre for Mental Health (GB)
Corresponding author
Young, S.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2016-02-12
Volume
46
Issue
7
Pages
1449-1458
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2317342236
Cited by
33
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
FWCI
4.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R24DA024868)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, adult ADHD, prisoners, ADHD screening, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, criminal justice system
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Cross-Sectional Studies, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Prisoners, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Sensitivity and Specificity

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