ArticlePersonality and mental health2015
Validation of the standardised assessment of personality--abbreviated scale in a general population sample.
Article in Personality and mental health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Moderating Factors for the Effectiveness of Brief Psychological Intervention for People With Probable Personality Disorder: Secondary Analysis of Data From the SPS Trial.Personality and mental health · 2026Trial
- Neuroeconomic adaptation to norm shifts is preserved in borderline personality disorder.Acta neuropsychiatrica · 2026Article
- Personality disorders in idiopathic generalized epilepsies in adults.Journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Prevalence and Correlates of Self-Stigma in Personality Disorder Compared With Anxiety and Depression: A National Cross-Sectional Survey.Personality and mental health · 2025Article
- Further Validation and Test-Retest Reliability of the Spanish Version of the Standardised Assessment of Personality - Abbreviated Scale (SAPAS) for Personality Disorder Screening in Community Mental Health Settings.Actas espanolas de psiquiatria · 2025Article
- The Psychological Emptiness Scale: a psychometric evaluation.BJPsych open · 2024Article
- The influence of peer non-suicidal self-harm on young adults' urges to self-harm: experimental study.Acta neuropsychiatrica · 2023Article
- Psychometric properties of the Japanese version of the standardised assessment of personality abbreviated scale.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Article
- Maternal personality traits, antenatal depressive symptoms and the postpartum mother-infant relationship: a prospective observational study.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2020Observational
- Article
- Validation of the standardised assessment of personality--abbreviated scale in a general population sample.Personality and mental health · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPersonality disorder (PD) is associated with important health outcomes in the general population. However, the length of diagnostic interviews poses a significant barrier to obtaining large scale, population-based data on PD. A brief screen for the identification of people at high risk of PD in the general population could be extremely valuable for both clinicians and researchers.
aimWe set out to validate the Standardised Assessment of Personality - Abbreviated Scale (SAPAS), in a general population sample, using the Structured Clinical Interviews for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (SCID-II) as a gold standard.
methodOne hundred and ten randomly selected, community-dwelling adults were administered the SAPAS screening interview. The SCID-II was subsequently administered by a clinical interviewer blind to the initial SAPAS score. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to assess the discriminatory performance of the SAPAS, relative to the SCID-II.
resultsArea under the curve for the SAPAS was 0.70 (95% CI = 0.60 to 0.80; p < 0.001), indicating moderate overall discriminatory accuracy. A cut point score of 4 on the SAPAS correctly classified 58% of participants. At this cut point, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.69 and 0.53 respectively.
conclusionThe SAPAS operates less efficiently as a screen in general population samples and is probably most usefully applied in clinical populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.