Stirk Steven, Field Bryony, Black Jessica
Learning Disability Service, Cornwall Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Faculty of Health & Human Sciences, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK.
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2018 Mar;31(2):e223-e228. doi: 10.1111/jar.12316. Epub 2016 Dec 19.
The Learning Disability Screening Questionnaire (LDSQ) has been shown to have high sensitivity and specificity to identify those who are likely to meet intellectual disability diagnostic criteria (McKenzie, et al. ). However, there is no independent research to date to support these findings.
An archival research design was used, utilizing data from diagnostic tools including the LDSQ, Wechsler Adult Intelligence assessments and Adaptive Behavior Assessment System Second Edition (ABAS-II) scores.
Sensitivity and specificity values derived here were lower than those reported by (McKenzie, et al. ). Only IQ, not adaptive/social functioning, was found to be an accurate predictor of the LDSQ score.
Results indicate limited validity in using (McKenzie, et al. ) proposed cut-off scores. The authors have expressed caution around using the LDSQ in isolation to identify those with an intellectual disability.
学习障碍筛查问卷（LDSQ）已被证明在识别那些可能符合智力障碍诊断标准的人方面具有高敏感性和特异性（麦肯齐等人）。然而，迄今为止尚无独立研究支持这些发现。
采用档案研究设计，利用来自诊断工具的数据，包括LDSQ、韦氏成人智力评估和适应性行为评估系统第二版（ABAS-II）得分。
此处得出的敏感性和特异性值低于（麦肯齐等人）报告的值。仅智商而非适应性/社会功能被发现是LDSQ分数的准确预测指标。
结果表明使用（麦肯齐等人）提出的临界值分数的有效性有限。作者已对单独使用LDSQ来识别智力障碍者表示谨慎。
