Department of Social Psychiatry, The Affiliated Brain Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University (Guangzhou Huiai Hospital), Guangzhou, China.
Centre for Studies of Psychological Applications, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Brain Cognition and Educational Science, School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Early Interv Psychiatry. 2022 Jan;16(1):69-77. doi: 10.1111/eip.13132. Epub 2021 Feb 16.
The 15-item positive subscale of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE-P15) has been widely used for measuring self-reported psychotic-like experiences (PLEs). However, its validity has not been well established. This study aimed to explore the consistency of self-reported PLEs (PLEs-S) and interview-verified PLEs (PLEs-I) based on the same items of the CAPE-P15.
A total of 1255 college students completed the CAPE-P15 for measuring lifetime and current PLEs. Half of the students with high-risk scores and 5% of the rest were interviewed through telephone. Telephone interviews were based on the items of the CAPE-P15 using the symptom criteria for attenuated positive symptom syndrome.
When considering the presence of PLEs only, all κ values and correspondence rates (CRs) fell below the thresholds. However, there was adequate consistency for lifetime PLEs when associated distress was also considered in self-report (κ = .432, CR = 90.0%). Among three factors, only bizarre experiences (BEs) showed adequate diagnostic accuracy in detecting lifetime PLEs when combined with distress. Cut-off points of 1.30 (sensitivity of 89.2% and specificity of 92.3%) and 1.57 (sensitivity of 79.2% and specificity of 73.8%) for frequency scores were found to best identify genuine PLEs during lifetime and in the past month, respectively.
Although the validity of the CAPE-P15 for genuine PLEs is unsatisfactory, the scale showed much better diagnostic accuracy when combined with associated distress, especially for detecting lifetime PLEs. Self-report items on BEs may be more sensitive and specific when identifying PLEs in late adolescence.
社区心理体验评估量表（CAPE-P15）的 15 项正性量表已被广泛用于测量自我报告的类精神病体验（PLEs）。然而，其有效性尚未得到充分证实。本研究旨在基于 CAPE-P15 的相同项目，探讨自我报告的 PLEs（PLEs-S）和访谈验证的 PLEs（PLEs-I）之间的一致性。
共有 1255 名大学生完成了 CAPE-P15 量表，用于测量一生中及当前的 PLEs。根据高危得分，将一半学生和其余学生的 5%进行电话访谈。电话访谈基于 CAPE-P15 的项目进行，采用减弱阳性症状综合征的症状标准。
仅考虑 PLEs 的存在时，所有 κ 值和符合率（CR）均低于阈值。然而，当自我报告中同时考虑到相关痛苦时，一生中 PLEs 的一致性较好（κ=0.432，CR=90.0%）。在三个因素中，只有奇异体验（BEs）在与痛苦相结合时，对一生中 PLEs 的检测具有足够的诊断准确性。在一生中及过去一个月中，频率得分的截断值为 1.30（敏感度为 89.2%，特异性为 92.3%）和 1.57（敏感度为 79.2%，特异性为 73.8%），可最好地识别真正的 PLEs。
尽管 CAPE-P15 对真正的 PLEs 的有效性并不令人满意，但当与相关痛苦结合使用时，该量表的诊断准确性有了很大提高，尤其是对一生中 PLEs 的检测。在识别青少年晚期的 PLEs 时，BEs 的自我报告项目可能更敏感和特异。
