Diagnostic Validity of the Drug Abuse Screening Test in the Assessment of DSM‐III Drug Disorders

Summary Diagnostic validity of the DAST was assessed using a clinical sample of 501 drug/alcohol patients. Various DAST cut‐points were validated against DSM‐III drug abuse/dependence criteria, as assessed by the Diagnostic Interview Schedule, The DAST attained 8S% overall accuracy in classifying pa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:British Journal of Addiction 1989-03, Vol.84 (3), p.301-307
Main Authors: GAVIN, DOUGLAS R., ROSS, HELEN E., SKINNER, HARVEY A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Biological and medical sciences
Female
Humans
Male
Manuals as Topic
Medical sciences
Nosology. Terminology. Diagnostic criteria
Predictive Value of Tests
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychometrics
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Sensitivity and Specificity
Substance-Related Disorders - diagnosis
Techniques and methods
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Summary Diagnostic validity of the DAST was assessed using a clinical sample of 501 drug/alcohol patients. Various DAST cut‐points were validated against DSM‐III drug abuse/dependence criteria, as assessed by the Diagnostic Interview Schedule, The DAST attained 8S% overall accuracy in classifying patients according to DSM‐III diagnosis. This accuracy was maintained between DAST score cut‐points of 5/6 through 9/10. Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis indicated that 5/6 was the optimum threshold score. The DAST was also correlated with demographic variables, psychiatric history, and drug use. The results showed very good concurrent and discriminant validity. This study concluded that fairly accurate estimation of DSM‐III drug criteria could be made using a brief self‐adminstered questionnaire (DAST). However, caution must be expressed when generalizing these findings to other contexts (e.g. the justice system) where subjects may have stronger motivation to under‐report drug involvement.
ISSN:0952-0481
0965-2140
2056-5178
DOI:10.1111/j.1360-0443.1989.tb03463.x