Diagnostic accuracy of a brief screening tool for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in UK prison inmates
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
A modified version of the BAARS-IV showed sensitivity and specificity levels above 80% in adult prison inmates.
“A modified version of the Barkley Adult ADHD Rating Scale (BAARS-IV) showed sensitivity and specificity levels above 80% in adult prison inmates (Young et al., 2016).”
From The Australian evidence-based clinical practice guideline for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (2023) · cites this paper as Young et al., 2016
Cites
KESSLER, R. C., ADLER, L., AMES, M., DEMLER, O., FARAONE, S., HIRIPI, E., HOWES, M. J., JIN, R., SECNIK, K., SPENCER, T., et al. (2005) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291704002892 · Cited by 3,452 · see citing works
FARAONE, S. V., BIEDERMAN, J., & MICK, E. (2006) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s003329170500471x · Cited by 2,267 · see citing works
Prevalence and correlates of adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: meta-analysis
Simon, V., Czobor, P., Bálint, S., Mészáros, Á., & Bitter, I. (2009) · British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.107.048827 · Cited by 1,601 · see citing works
(1993) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/ajp.150.6.885 · Cited by 1,421 · see citing works
Shaw, M., Hodgkins, P., Caci, H., Young, S., Kahle, J., Woods, A. G., & Arnold, L. E. (2012) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-10-99 · Cited by 759 · see citing works
Self-citationvan Emmerik-van Oortmerssen, K., van de Glind, G., van den Brink, W., Smit, F., Crunelle, C. L., Swets, M., & Schoevers, R. A. (2012) · Drug and Alcohol Dependence · doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.12.007 · Cited by 535 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
May, T., Birch, E., Chaves, K., Cranswick, N., Culnane, E., Delaney, J., Derrick, M., Eapen, V., Edlington, C., Efron, D., et al. (2023) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/00048674231166329 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
“A modified version of the Barkley Adult ADHD Rating Scale (BAARS-IV) showed sensitivity and specificity levels above 80% in adult prison inmates (Young et al., 2016).”
Method
- 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
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- 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