You are on page 1of 1

Tool

Ag
e
(yr
s)
317

Items
+
factor
s
80
items
6
factors

Validity

Connors Rating Scale


Revised

CRS-r

Swanson, Nolan, and


Pelham-IV
Questionnaire

SNAP
IV

511

90
items
2
factors

Lacks published
psychometric data

Strengths and
Weaknesses of ADHD
Symptoms
and Normal Behavior

SWAN

511

26
items
3
factors

Lacks published
psychometric
data

Swanson, Kotkin, MFlynn, and Pelham


Rating Scale

SKAMP

712

Limited psychometric
data

Vanderbilt ADHD
Teacher Rating Scale
and
Vanderbilt ADHD
Parent Rating Scale
Brown AttentionDeficit Disorder Scales
for Children
and Adolescents

VADTRS
VADPRS

612

13
items
2
factors
43
items
6
factors

Only concurrent validity


data

BADDS

318

40-50
items

Good psychometric
data but few published
studies

ADHD Rating Scale

ADHD
RS-IV

518

18
items
2
factors

ADHD Symptoms
Rating Scale

ADHD
SRS

Attention Deficit
Disorder Evaluation
Scale

ADDES
2

Conners Third edition

Conner
s3

418

Good published
psychometrics
Criterion validity tested

Reliabilty

Sensiti
vity

Specific
ity

Cost

Comorbid
items

Ease of use

Time
(mins
)

Application

P92%
T78%
A81%

P 94%
T91%
A84%

233.60
(Kit)

Yes

Long and Short forms


French Canadian version
Computer, fax+ mail scoring

20-30

Multiple
Published
Adolescent
form

MAJOR
Circular
Proof

Nil

Nil

Free

Yes but
poor
support

On internet
Website scoring

20-30

Multiple
Published

Not
assessed

Nil

Nil

Free

No

Unique as scores Strengths as


well as Weaknesses so less overidentification of extreme cases

Few published

IR+IC Nil
TR good
N Nil

Not
assessed

Nil

Nil

No

School use only

Treatment
limited

IR poor
IC(T) good
IC(P) exc
TR Nil
N limited
IR low-mod
IC good-exc for P,T+A
TR mod-good
N strat by age +sex

Not
assessed

Yes

Spanish and German translations


Easy to complete

10-15

Few
published

MINOR
Screening
bias

Low

Good

201
(Kit)

Good published
psychometric data
Criterion validity tested

IR low
IC(P) good
IC(T) good
TR (P) good
TR (T) good
N good + strat by age
+sex

MINOR
Screening
Sample+
Informant
bias

P84%
T63-72%

P49%
T86%

$45

56
items
2
factors

Psychometric data from


manual
Few published studies

IR poor
IC (P) exc
TR (T) exc
Limited N small US pop
strat by age +sex (only
2 age grps)

Not
assessed

Nil

Nil

50
items
2
factors

Psychometric data from


manual
Few published studies

IR (P+T)good
IC (P+T)exc
TR(P+T)exc
N strat by age +sex

No major or
minor

Nil

Nil

6110
Good psychometric
18
items
data from manual
P/T
Lacks published data
8ADHD Assessment Tools Table Used to help inform pilot choices
18
SR

IR poor low
IC good
TR poor-good
N US/Can
Strat by age +sex
IR poor
IC good exc
TR Nil
N limited (hispanic)
no strat
Nil
N Nil

Study
Flaws
(Snyder
2006)
MAJOR
Limited Gen
Circular
proof

IR P good, T mod/good
IC Pgood/exc, Texc, SR
good
TR Pgood/exc, Tgood,
SRgood
N strat age /sex/race

Free

Discrim. Val.
Long scale
P 77% T 75%
SR 72%
Im.val
Long

$635.95
(Kit)

Unique as 1)measures underlying


executive function deficits
2)different rating scales for each
age group (3-7, 8-12 and 12-18)
taking account of developmental
changes
No

Lacks published
clinical
applications

Spanish version
Easy scoring
Clinician administered instrument
available

5-10

Multiple
Published
Validity less in
Asian+
Africanamerica
n population

Spanish version
Computer scoring

15-20

Few published
Mainly research

No

Spanish version
Computer scoring
Confusing- lower scores for
greater pathology

10-15

Multiple
clinical

Yes

Spanish version
Quikscore paper + online
Computer package

20

Lacks published
data

N = Normative data; IR= interrater reliability; IC = internal consistency; TR = test retest reliability; P= parent; T = teacher; A = adolescent; strat = stratified;
Poor=<0.3; Low=0.3-0.5; Mod=0.5-0.7; Good=0.7-0.9; Exc=>0.9.