Journal of psychiatric research · 2025
Predictive validity of the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-4 and Florida Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-II severity scale.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Storch Eric A, McCarty Ryan J, Zehavi Maya, Ahmad Mahnoor, Cruz Vanessa Zavala, Berrones Dayan, Muñoz Josselyn S, Obando Diana, Rodriguez Barajas Servando, Frederick Renee M, Anderberg Jacey L, Moore Hannah C, Ochoa-Panaifo Marcos E, Martinez Mallen Mayra C, Onyeka Ogechi C, Wiese Andrew D, Sagarnaga Melisa N, McGuire Joseph F, Ferrão Ygor Arzeno, Latin American Trans-Ancestry INitiative for OCD genomics (LATINO), Brazilian Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorder Working Group (GTTOC), Goodman Wayne K, Crowley James J
Аннотация
Efficient and accurate screening tools are crucial for improving early identification and treatment outcomes among individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). This study evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of two OCD screening measures: the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-4 (OCI-4) and the Florida Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-II (FOCI-II) severity scale. The measures were administered in a large transnational sample of Spanish speaking Latin American adults (N = 1696) with elevated obsessive-compulsive symptomatology. Participants completed diagnostic interviews (MINI and Y-BOCS) and self-report assessments across 23 sites in 11 countries. Both measures significantly distinguished OCD from non-OCD cases, with the FOCI-II demonstrating somewhat better predictive performance (AUC = .79) compared to the OCI-4 (AUC = .69). A score of 7 or greater for both the OCI-4 (64 % sensitivity, 66 % specificity) and FOCI-II severity scale (74 % sensitivity, 70 % specificity) were found to be the most appropriate cutoffs across the overall sample. Findings provide some support in the use of both tools in clinical and research contexts, with some comparative benefits of the FOCI-II.