Hatton Chris, Taylor John L
Institute for Health Research, Lancaster University, UK.
J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2008 Dec;33(4):330-6. doi: 10.1080/13668250802441656.
The PAS-ADD Checklist is designed to screen for likely mental health problems in people with intellectual disabilities (ID). The specificity of recommended subscales derived from diagnostic criteria is unclear. This paper therefore investigates the factor structure of the PAS-ADD Checklist to determine the adequacy of empirically derived subscales.
A total of 1,115 informants who had known service users for a median of 24 months completed the PAS-ADD Checklist on 1,155 adults with ID living either in the community, in residential care, or in hospital settings in a county in North-East England.
The sample was randomly divided into two, with all item scores dichotomised. An exploratory principal components factor analysis with varimax rotation was conducted on Subsample A, producing an optimal 7-factor solution. However, a confirmatory factor analysis using this factor structure for Subsample B revealed a mediocre to poor fit. Further exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses also indicated that empirically derived PAS-ADD Checklist subscales were inconsistent.
Given the inconsistency of empirically derived subscales, we do not recommend using the PAS-ADD Checklist to identify specific types of psychopathology. The Checklist may have more utility as a screening tool for general psychopathology and subsequent referral for more detailed assessment.
PAS - ADD检查表旨在筛查智力残疾（ID）人群中可能存在的心理健康问题。源自诊断标准的推荐子量表的特异性尚不清楚。因此，本文研究了PAS - ADD检查表的因子结构，以确定基于实证得出的子量表是否合适。
共有1115名了解服务对象中位数为24个月的信息提供者，对居住在英格兰东北部一个县的社区、寄宿照料机构或医院环境中的1155名成年ID患者完成了PAS - ADD检查表。
样本被随机分为两组，所有项目得分进行二分法处理。对A子样本进行了具有方差最大化旋转的探索性主成分因子分析，得出了最优的7因子解决方案。然而，对B子样本使用该因子结构进行验证性因子分析显示拟合度中等至较差。进一步的探索性和验证性因子分析也表明，基于实证得出的PAS - ADD检查表子量表不一致。
鉴于基于实证得出的子量表不一致，我们不建议使用PAS - ADD检查表来识别特定类型的精神病理学。该检查表作为一般精神病理学的筛查工具以及随后转介进行更详细评估可能更有用。
