Translation and validation of the Brown attention-deficit disorder scale for use in Brazil: identifying cases of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder among samples of substance users and non-users. Cross-cultural validation study.

BACKGROUND: The Brown Attention-Deficit Disorder Scale (BADDS) was developed as a self-report assessment that was designed to screen for presence of symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The objective here was to translate and validate the adult self-report BADDS for use in Brazil. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-cultural validation study conducted in an addiction unit at a public university hospital. METHODS: This study included a control group (n = 100) and a drug-user group (n = 100). Both groups included subjects aged 18 to 60 years old. The control group had no prior diagnosis of drug addiction and the drug-user group included participants with a diagnosis of addiction. Each participant answered Brazilian Portuguese translations of both the BADDS and the Adult Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Self-Report Scale (ASRS) questionnaires, in paper-and-pencil format. RESULTS: The drug-user group scored higher than the control group on both scales. The mean scores on ASRS were 27.26 (standard deviation, SD: 11.99) and 25.85 (SD: 8.65) respectively (P > 0.05). The mean scores on BADDS were 79.56 (SD: 29.61) and 79.31 (SD: 18.09), respectively (P > 0.05). Cronbach's alpha for BADDS was 0.95. BADDS presented fair sensitivity (72% accuracy) and fair specificity (88% accuracy). CONCLUSION: This study provides discriminative validity evidence for use of BADDS among Brazilian adults with substance-use disorders.

Translation and validation of the Brown attention-deficit disorder scale for use in Brazil: identifying cases of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder among samples of substance users and non-users. Cross-cultural validation study

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The Brown Attention-Deficit Disorder Scale (BADDS) was developed as a self-report assessment that was designed to screen for presence of symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The objective here was to translate and validate the adult self-report BADDS for use in Brazil. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-cultural validation study conducted in an addiction unit at a public university hospital. METHODS: This study included a control group (n = 100) and a drug-user group (n = 100). Both groups included subjects aged 18 to 60 years old. The control group had no prior diagnosis of drug addiction and the drug-user group included participants with a diagnosis of addiction. Each participant answered Brazilian Portuguese translations of both the BADDS and the Adult Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Self-Report Scale (ASRS) questionnaires, in paper-and-pencil format. RESULTS: The drug-user group scored higher than the control group on both scales. The mean scores on ASRS were 27.26 (standard deviation, SD: 11.99) and 25.85 (SD: 8.65) respectively (P > 0.05). The mean scores on BADDS were 79.56 (SD: 29.61) and 79.31 (SD: 18.09), respectively (P > 0.05). Cronbach's alpha for BADDS was 0.95. BADDS presented fair sensitivity (72% accuracy) and fair specificity (88% accuracy). CONCLUSION: This study provides discriminative validity evidence for use of BADDS among Brazilian adults with substance-use disorders.

Reproducibility of classifications for olecranon fractures.

INTRODUCTION: Fractures of the olecranon are relatively common injuries in adults and are of great clinical importance. Classification systems have been developed as tools to assist surgeons in grouping different types of fractures, to facilitate communication and to standardise treatment, but none of the systems used today is universally accepted for olecranon fractures. METHODS: Fifty-nine olecranon fractures were classified according to the Schatzker, Colton, Mayo and AO/ASIF systems by four observers with different levels of expertise. Intra- and inter-observer agreement was assessed. Each observer analysed the images at three different times; the images were randomised and presented in a different sequence at each assessment. RESULTS: There was higher mean intra-observer agreement in the AO/ASIF (0.60) and Mayo (0.64) classifications compared with the Schatzker (0.49) and Colton (0.38) classifications. Inter-observer agreement was better with AO/ASIF and Mayo (0.35 and 0.32, respectively) than with Schatzker and Colton (0.29 and 0.12, respectively). CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that the most commonly used classifications for olecranon fractures are associated with low reproducibility.