Search results

Anxiety disorder is a common mental health problem in people with intellectual disabilities. Although this affects their quality of life, in Spain, there are no validated tools to evaluate the symptomatology of anxiety in people with intellectual disabilities. The aim of this study is to validate the Glasgow Anxiety Scale for people with an intellectual disability (GAS-ID) in the Spanish population.

The Spanish version of the GAS-ID was produced by back translation and was administered to 120 adults with intellectual disabilities. The psychometric analyses included internal consistency using the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, inter-rater and test-retest reliability were determined using intra class correlation and Pearson correlation coefficients and, finally, factor analysis with Varimax rotation to confirm the construct validity of the questionnaire.

Cronbach’s alpha was 0.86 for the overall questionnaire. The intraclass correlation coefficient showed a good level of agreement in both test-retest (0.90) and inter-rater (0.91) analysis and the Pearson correlation showed a good significance in all dimensions and in the total scale. Varimax rotation factor analysis revealed four well-defined factors.

The GAS-ID is a feasible and reliable instrument for assessing anxiety symptoms in adults with mild and moderate intellectual disabilities, offering better diagnoses and therefore a more accurate treatment for the Spanish population with intellectual disabilities.

This study aims to validate a Spanish version of the Glasgow Depression Scale for Learning Disability (GDS-LD) and of the Glasgow Depression Care Supplement Scale (GDS-CS).

The GDS-LD was administered to 120 adults with mild and moderate intellectual disabilities and the GDS-CS to the staff from their occupational workshops (n = 120) to detect symptoms of depression. Internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, criterion validity, construct validity and the feasibility and applicability of both scales were analysed.

Both scales showed an adequate internal consistency (GDS-LD, a = 0.86) (GDS-CS, a = 0.88). Exploratory factor analysis revealed four well-defined factors in GDS-LD and three in GDS-CS. Pearson correlation analysis data has also been carried out with both tools for test-retest and inter-rater, showing good correlations.

In terms, of limitations, the participants were recruited from the same centre, so this could be a problem in terms of generalisation. In addition, the GDS-LD and GDS-CS scales were developed for people with mild and moderate ID; it would be worth it to develop a version for people with severe and profound disabilities.

From its clinical perspective, it will be possible to have a specific tool that assesses the symptoms of depression in the Spanish population with ID. Furthermore, as it is a user-friendly scale; it can be administrated by both mental health and other professionals working in the field of disability.

The Spanish version of the GDS-LD and GDS-CS showed adequate rates of feasibility and reliability to assess symptoms depression among Spanish speaking adults with mild and moderate ID.