Ross H E, Gavin D R, Skinner H A
Addiction Research Foundation, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
J Stud Alcohol. 1990 Nov;51(6):506-13. doi: 10.15288/jsa.1990.51.506.
The comparative validity of the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (MAST) and the Alcohol Dependence Scale (ADS) in screening for current DSM-III alcohol abuse/dependence disorders is evaluated. These scales were administered to 501 patients presenting for treatment of alcohol or drug problems. DSM-III alcohol disorders are diagnosed using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis is used to determine optimum threshold scores for the MAST and ADS and to compare the screening ability of the two instruments. Optimum cut points for the MAST and the ADS are 12/13 and 8/9, respectively. The overall accuracy of classification for both instruments using these threshold scores is 88%. The areas under the ROC curves are .91 and .90 (SD = .02) and there are no significant differences between the MAST and the ADS in their ability to screen for alcohol abuse or dependence in this population. The MAST and the ADS correlate highly with each other (.79). The results reported in our study should be applicable to the revised DSM-III since a field trial found a high level of agreement on alcohol disorders between the diagnostic systems. Categorical versus dimensional approaches to the assessment of alcoholism are discussed.
评估了密歇根酒精中毒筛查测试(MAST)和酒精依赖量表(ADS)在筛查当前《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第三版(DSM - III)酒精滥用/依赖障碍方面的比较效度。这些量表被施用于501名前来治疗酒精或药物问题的患者。使用诊断访谈表来诊断DSM - III酒精障碍。采用受试者工作特征(ROC)分析来确定MAST和ADS的最佳阈值分数,并比较这两种工具的筛查能力。MAST和ADS的最佳切点分别为12/13和8/9。使用这些阈值分数时,两种工具的总体分类准确率为88%。ROC曲线下的面积分别为0.91和0.90(标准差 = 0.02),在该人群中,MAST和ADS在筛查酒精滥用或依赖的能力方面没有显著差异。MAST和ADS彼此高度相关(0.79)。我们研究中报告的结果应适用于修订后的DSM - III,因为一项现场试验发现诊断系统之间在酒精障碍方面有高度的一致性。讨论了酒精中毒评估的分类法与维度法。