Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.660457
Title: An examination of the use of two methods of screening tools in learning disability services
Author: Paxton, D.
Awarding Body: University of Edinburgh
Current Institution: University of Edinburgh
Date of Award: 2005
Availability of Full Text:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please contact the current institution’s library for further details.
Abstract:
Rationale: The increasing need for clinical psychology services has led to the use of screening tools, particularly in specialities where there are limited resources. The present study explores the use of two screening tools in learning disability services. The first part of the study examines the ability of a new screening tool, the Learning Disability Screening Questionnaire, to discriminate between individuals with a learning disability and those who do not have a learning disability. The second part of the study explored the ability of the two and four subtests of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale- Third Edition (WAIS –III) which correspond to the parallel subtests of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) to discriminate between both groups. Method: An examination of case files from a learning disability psychology service in a rural area of Scotland was undertaken. There were 160 participants included in part one of the study and 275 in part two. Information was gathered regarding individual’s subtest scores on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale- Third Edition (WAIS-III) and the items included in the screening tool. Results: The Learning Disability Screening Questionnaire achieved several measures of reliability and validity. A logistic regression was carried out on both forms of screening tools and found that the two subtest parallel short form of the WASI correctly predicted 66.2% of group membership; whilst the four subtest parallel short form of the WASI correctly predicted 82.7% of group membership. The Learning Disability Screening Questionnaire correctly predicted 89.3% of group membership. Implications for clinical practice for both forms of screening tools are discussed in detail.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (D.Clin.Psych.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.660457  DOI: Not available
Share: