4.7 Article

The VAGUS insight into psychosis scale - Self-report and clinician-rated versions

Journal

PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH
Volume 220, Issue 3, Pages 1084-1089

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.08.005

Keywords

Insight; Illness Awareness; Schizophrenia; Schizoaffective disorder; Symptom assessment

Categories

Funding

  1. Ontario Mental Health Foundation grant (OMHF)
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MOP-114989]
  3. Clinician Scientist Program, Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto
  4. Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
  5. OMHF

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to develop self-report and clinician-rated versions of an insight scale that would be easy to administer, sensitive to small changes, and inclusive of the core dimensions of clinical insight into psychosis. Ten-item self-report (VAGUS-SR) and five-item clinician-rated (VAGUS-CR) scales were designed to measure the dimensions of insight into psychosis and evaluated in 215 and 140 participants, respectively (www.vagusonline.com). Tests of reliability and validity were performed. Both the VAGUS-SR and VAGUS-CR showed good internal consistency and reliability. They demonstrated good convergent and discriminant validity. Both versions were strongly correlated with one another and with the Schedule for the Assessment of Insight and Birchwood Insight Scale. Exploratory factor analyses identified three possible latent components of insight. The VAGUS-CR and VAGUS-SR are valid, reliable and easy to administer. They are build on previous insight scales with separate clinician-rated and self-report versions. The VAGUS-SR exhibited a multidimensional factor structure. Using a 10-point Likert scale for each item, the VAGUS has the capacity to detect small, temporally sensitive changes in insight, which is essential for intervention studies with neurostimulation or rapidly acting medications. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available