Dataset Information

The Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences-Positive scale (CAPE-P15) accurately classifies and differentiates psychotic experience levels in adolescents from the general population.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is increasing interest in studying psychotic symptoms in non-clinical populations, with the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences-Positive scale (CAPE-P15) being one of the self-screening questionnaires used most commonly for this purpose. Further research is needed to evaluate the ability of the scale to accurately identify and classify positive psychotic experiences (PE) in the general population.

Aim

To provide psychometric evidence about the accuracy of the CAPE-P15 for detecting PE in a sample of Chilean adolescents from the general population and classifying them according to their PE severity levels.

Method

We administered the CAPE-P15 to a general sample of 1594 students aged 12 to 19. Based on Item Response Theory (IRT), we tested the accuracy of the instrument using two main parameters: difficulty and discrimination power of the 15 items.

Results

We found that the scale provides very accurate information about PE, particularly for high PE levels. The items with the highest capability to determine the presence of the latent trait were those assessing perceptual anomalies (auditory and visual hallucinations), bizarre experiences (a double has taken the place of others; being controlled by external forces), and persecutory ideation (conspiracy against me).

Conclusions

The CAPE-P15 is an accurate and suitable tool to screen PE and to accurately classify and differentiate PE levels in adolescents from the general population. Further research is needed to better understand how maladaptive psychological mechanisms influence relationships between PE and suicidal ideation (SI) in the general population.

SUBMITTER: Nunez D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8389461 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose: Psychotic experiences in childhood (such as hearing voices or being suspicious) represent an important phenotype for early intervention. However, these experiences can be defined in several ways: self-reported psychotic experiences (SRPE) rely exclusively on the child's report, clinically validated psychotic experiences (CRPE) are based on clinical assessment, and attenuated psychotic symptoms (APS) represents a categorization to do with clinical relevance in relation to severity. Very few studies have investigated how these distinctions impact clinical and other domains. The present study aims to compare SRPE, CRPE, and APS among children and adolescents. Methods: This study is part of the Brazilian High-Risk Cohort Study for Psychiatric Disorders, in which 2,241 individuals aged 6-14 years provided self-ratings of 20 psychotic experiences using the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE). A trained psychologist conducted an interview to validate or reject reported experiences and to rate the presence of APS and affective flattening. In parallel, parents provided information about child mental health to an independent interviewer. We tested the association of mutually exclusive categories of non-validated SRPE (nSRPE), clinically validated PE below the threshold for APS (nCRPE), and APS (nSRPE = 33%, nCRPE = 11%, APS = 6%), with parents' information about the child's positive attributes and levels of psychopathology and psychologist assessment of blunted affect. Results: Most associations were qualitatively similar, and there was a dose-response in the strength of associations across categories, such that APS > nCRPE > nSRPE. Experiences in all three categories were associated with female sex. nSRPE were associated with overall levels of psychopathology, but to a lesser degree than nCRPE and APS. APS and nCRPE were associated with less positive attributes, with APS more so than nCRPE. Only APS was associated with affective flattening. Conclusions: In children and adolescents, SRPE, CRPE, and APS all index liability for psychopathology, but as clinician rated relevance increases, associations get stronger and become evident across more domains.

Project description:ObjectiveThe Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences has been widely translated and commonly used as a measure for psychotic experiences and psychosis proneness in clinical and research environments worldwide. This study aimed to establish the psychometric properties (reliability and validity) and factor structure of a Korean version of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (K-CAPE) in the general population.MethodsA total of 1,467 healthy participants completed K-CAPE and other psychiatric symptom-related scales (Paranoia scale, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Dissociative Experiences Scale-II, and Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences) via online survey. K-CAPE's internal reliability was analyzed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to investigate whether the original three-factor model (positive, negative, and depressive) and other hypothesized multidimensional models (including positive and negative subfactors) were suitable for our data. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to explore better alternative factor solutions with a follow-up CFA. To assess convergent and discriminant validity, we examined correlations between K-CAPE subscales with other established measures of psychiatric symptoms.ResultsK-CAPE showed good internal consistency in all original three subscales (all greater than α=0.827). The CFA demonstrated that the multidimensional models exhibited relatively better quality than the original three-dimensional model. Although the model fit indices did not reach their respective optimal thresholds, they were within an acceptable range. Results from the EFA indicated 3-5 factor solutions. In 3-factor solution, "negative-avolition" items were founded to be loaded more consistently with depressive items than with the negative dimension. In 4-factor solution, positive items were divided into two subfactors: "positive-bizarre experiences" and "positive-delusional thoughts," while negative symptoms were separated into two distinct subfactors in 5-factor solution: "negative-avolition (expressive)," and "negative-social (experiential)." The correlation coefficients between K-CAPE subscales and corresponding measurements were significant (p<0.001), confirming the convergent and discriminant validity.ConclusionOur study provides evidence to support the reliability and validity of the K-CAPE and its use as a measure of psychotic symptoms in the Korean population. Although alternative factor structures did not improve the model fit, our EFA findings implicate the use of subfactors to investigate more specific domains of positive and negative symptoms. Given the heterogeneous nature of psychotic symptoms, this may be useful in capturing their different underlying mechanisms.