Norms for Zung's Self-rating Anxiety Scale

Title
Norms for Zung's Self-rating Anxiety Scale
Publication Date
2020-02-28
Author(s)
Dunstan, Debra A
( author )
OrcID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0298-7393
Email: ddunstan@une.edu.au
UNE Id une-id:ddunstan
Scott, Ned
Type of document
Journal Article
Language
en
Entity Type
Publication
Publisher
BioMed Central Ltd
Place of publication
United Kingdom
DOI
10.1186/s12888-019-2427-6
UNE publication id
une:1959.11/29753
Abstract
Background
Zung's Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) is a norm-referenced scale which enjoys widespread use a screener for anxiety disorders. However, recent research (Dunstan DA and Scott N, Depress Res Treat 2018:9250972, 2018) has questioned whether the existing cut-off for identifying the presence of a disorder might be lower than ideal.
Method
The current study explored this issue by examining sensitivity and specificity figures against diagnoses made on the basis of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) in clinical and community samples. The community sample consisted of 210 participants recruited to be representative of the Australian adult population. The clinical sample consisted of a further 141 adults receiving treatment from a mental health professional for some form of anxiety disorder.
Results
Mathematical formulas, including Youden's Index and the Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve, applied to positive PHQ diagnoses (presence of a disorder) from the clinical sample and negative PHQ diagnoses (absence of a disorder) from the community sample suggested that the ideal cut-off point lies between the current and original points recommended by Zung.
Conclusions
Consideration of prevalence rates and of the potential costs of false negative and false positive diagnoses, suggests that, while the current cut-off of 36 might be appropriate in the context of clinical screening, the original raw score cut-off of 40 would be most appropriate when the SAS is used in research.
Link
Citation
BMC Psychiatry, v.20, p. 1-8
ISSN
1471-244X
Start page
1
End page
8
Rights
Attribution 4.0 International

Files:

NameSizeformatDescriptionLink
openpublished/NormsDunstanScott2020JournalArticle.pdf 639.485 KB application/pdf Published version View document