Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-k8lnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T04:02:48.865Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of the discriminative validity of a screening tool (MINI-SPIN) for social anxiety disorder applied to Brazilian university students

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2020

Flávia de Lima Osório ,
José Alexandre Crippa  and
Sonia Regina Loureiro
Flávia de Lima Osório*
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, Medical School of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Av. dos Bandeirantes 3900, Campus Universitário, Ribeirão Preto, CEP 14048-900, São Paulo, Brazil
José Alexandre Crippa
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, Medical School of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Av. dos Bandeirantes 3900, Campus Universitário, Ribeirão Preto, CEP 14048-900, São Paulo, Brazil
Sonia Regina Loureiro
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, Medical School of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Av. dos Bandeirantes 3900, Campus Universitário, Ribeirão Preto, CEP 14048-900, São Paulo, Brazil
*
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +55 16 36022837. E-mail addresses:flaliosorio@ig.com.br (F. de Lima Osório), jcrippa@fmrp.usp.br (J.A. Crippa), srlourei@fmrp.usp.br (S.R. Loureiro).
Get access

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the discriminative validity of MINI-SPIN (MS) as a screening tool for social anxiety disorder (SAD) in a group of Brazilian university students.

Method

SPIN was collectively applied to 2320 university students. Among them, 656 individuals who fulfilled the criteria for positive MS (N = 473) and negative MS (N = 183) were selected and divided into two groups. The selected subjects were interviewed by telephone using the SAD module of the SCID-IV, used as the gold standard. In order to check interrater reliability, a group of university students (N = 57) was reinterviewed by telephone by a second rater, and another group (N = 100) participated in a face-to-face interview.

Results

The Kappa coefficient among the telephone interviews was 0.80, and a coefficient of 0.84 (P < 0.001) was obtained between the telephone interview and the face-to-face one. For a cut-off score of 6, suggested in the original English version of the instrument, sensitivity was 0.94, specificity 0.46, the positive predictive value (PPV) was 0.58, and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 0.92. For a cut-off score of 7, we observed an increase in the specificity and in the PPV (0.68 and 0.65) while the sensitivity and NPV (0.78 and 0.80) remained high.

Discussion/Conclusion

MS showed quite satisfactory psychometric qualities. The cut-off score of 6 seemed to be the most suitable to attest the tracking value of the tool. However, the cut-off score of 7 was the most suitable as a minimum parameter for the studied group, with psychometric values more similar to those of the original study.

Keywords

ValidityReliabilityPsychometricsSocial phobiaSocial anxiety disorderDiagnostic screening

Information

Type
Original article
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , May 2007 , pp. 239 - 243
Copyright
Copyright © Elsevier Masson SAS 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

American Psychiatric Association (APA). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th ed.Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994.Google Scholar
Brunello, N.Den Boer, J.A.Judd, L.L.Kasper, S.Kelsey, J.E.Lader, M.et al.Social phobia: diagnosis and epidemiology, neurobiology and pharmacology, comorbidity and treatment. J Affect Disord 2000;60:61–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Connor, K.M.Davidson, J.R.T.Churchill, L.E.Sherwood, A.Foa, E.Weisler, R.H.Psychometric properties of Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN). Br J Psychiatry 2000;176:379–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connor, K.M.Kobak, K.A.Churchill, L.E.Katzelnick, D.Davidson, J.Mini-Spin: A brief screening assessment for generalized social anxiety disorder. Depress Anxiety 2001;14:137–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, J.A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol 1960;20:37–46.Google Scholar
Davidson, J.R.Hughes, D.L.George, L.K.Blazer, D.G.The epidemiology of social phobia: findings from the Duke Epidemiological Catchment Area Study. Psychol Med 1993;23(3):709–718.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Del-Ben, C.M.Vilela, J.A.A.Crippa, J.A.S.Hallak, J.E.C.Labate, C.M.Zuardi, A.W.Test-retest reliability of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV—Clinical Version (SCID-CV) translated into Portuguese. Rev Bras Psiquiatr 2001;23:156–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Den Boer, J.A.Social anxiety disorder/social phobia: epidemiology, diagnosis, neurobiology, and treatment. Compr Psychiatry 2000;41(6):405–415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleiss, J.Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1981.Google Scholar
Goodwin, R.D.Stayner, D.A.Chinman, M.J.Wu, P.Tebes, J.K.Davidson, L.The relationship between anxiety and substance use disorders among individuals with severe affective disorders. Compr Psychiatry 2002;43(4):245–252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hidalgo, R.B.Barnett, S.D.Davidson, J.R.Social anxiety disorder in review: two decades of progress. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 2001;4(3):279–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katzelnick, D.J.Kobak, K.A.DeLeire, T.Henk, H.J.Greist, J.H.Davidson, J.R.et al.Impact of generalized social anxiety disorder in managed care. Am J Psychiatry 2001;158(12):1999–2007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kessler, R.C.Stein, M.B.Berglund, P.Social phobia subtypes in national comorbitidy survey. Am J Psychiatry 1998;155(5):613–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lépine, J.P.The epidemiology of anxiety disorders: prevalence and societal costs. J Clin Psychiatry 2002;63(suppl 14):4–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Mathew, S.J.Coplan, J.D.Gorman, J.M.Neurobiological mechanisms of social anxiety disorder. Am J Psychiatry 2001;158(10):1558–1567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moutier, C.Y.Stein, M.B.The history, epidemiology, and differential diagnosis of social anxiety disorder. J Clin Psychiatry 1999;60(suppl 9):4–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Osório, F.L.Graeff, F.Busato, G.De Pinho, M.Mazza, M.Crippa, J.A.S.et al.Inventário de Fobia Social (SPIN): validação para o Brasil. Rev Bras Psiquiatr 2004;26(supl II):6.Google Scholar
Patel, A.Knapp, M.Henderson, J.Baldwin, D.The economic consequences of social phobia. J Affect Disord 2002;68(2–3):221–233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raj, B.A.Sheehan, D.V.Social anxiety disorder. Med Clin North Am 2001;85(3):711–733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneier, F.R.Johnson, J.Homig, C.D.Liebowitz, M.R.Weissman, M.M.Social phobia: comorbidity and morbidity in an epidemiologic sample. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1992;49(4):282–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sareen, J.Stein, M.A review of the epidemiology and approaches to the treatment of social anxiety disorder. Drugs 2000;59(3):497–509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spitzer, R.L.Williams, J.B.Gibbon, M.First, M.B.Instruction manual for the Structured Clinical Interview dor DSM-III-R (SCID). New York: Biometrics Research Department/ New York State Psychiatric Institute; 1989.Google Scholar
Wilson, I.Screening for social anxiety disorder in first year university students—a pilot study. Aust Family Phys 2005;34(11):983–984.Google ScholarPubMed
Wittchen, H.U.Fehm, L.Epidemiology, patterns of comorbidity, and associated disabilities of social phobia. Psychiatry Clin North Am 2001;24(4):617–641.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.