Validation of the English version of the Parkinson Anxiety Scale in two Canadian Parkinson’s disease samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The 12-item Parkinson Anxiety Scale (PAS) assesses the severity of anxiety symptoms in people with Parkinson's disease (PwP). However, psychometric evidence supporting the English self-rated PAS remains largely limited to validation studies by the developers. This study aimed to reinforce validation of this scale through a comprehensive psychometric evaluation in PwP in Canada. Methods: Data were drawn from two Canadian samples of 130 and 53 PwP, respectively, at a tertiary center. Acceptability, reliability, validity, and factor structure were assessed. The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview was administered to confirm anxiety diagnoses. Optimal cut-off scores suggesting the presence of an anxiety disorder were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results: The PAS and its three subscales demonstrated good acceptability and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α > 0.70). Good convergent validity with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and divergent validity with scales assessing other non-motor symptoms were obtained. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the three-factor structure (comparative fit index = 0.987; Tucker-Lewis index = 0.983; root mean square error of approximation = 0.083; standardized root mean square residual = 0.087). Optimal cut-off scores were 12.5 for the total PAS (area under the ROC curve = 0.81, sensitivity = 0.89, specificity = 0.58), 8.5 for the persistent anxiety subscale, and 2.5 for the episodic anxiety and avoidance behavior subscales. Approximately 22 % of participants in the larger sample had a diagnosed anxiety disorder. Conclusion: The English self-rated PAS is a valid and reliable instrument for screening and assessing severity and dimensions of anxiety in PwP.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".