Several tools have been developed to assess insight, which can be measured using either clinician-rated or self-reported tools, each with advantages and limitations. The VAGUS Insight into Psychosis clinician-rated (VAGUS-CR) and the VAGUS self-report (VAGUS-SR) scales are brief clinician-rated and self-report measures assessing several dimensions of insight. This study aimed to translate, adapt, and validate the VAGUS scale in Arabic for use among Arabic-speaking psychotic populations. A cross-sectional study was conducted between June and July 2025 at the Psychiatric Hospital of the Cross, Lebanon. The study included 121 inpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia disorder, including a small number with schizoaffective disorder. The VAGUS Insight Scale was used to assess different dimensions of insight through the clinician-rated version and the self-report version. A principal component analysis revealed a one-factor construct for the VAGUS-CR explaining 47.96% of the total variance (Cronbach's α = 0.668). For the VAGUS-SR, a three-factor structure was identified, accounting for 54.55% of the variance (Cronbach's α for the total VAGUS-SR scale = 0.636). Test-retest reliability for the VAGUS-SR was good (ICC = 0.920, p < 0.001). For the VAGUS-CR, the total score displayed good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.896, p < 0.001). The inter-rater reliability of the VAGUS-CR total score reached excellent agreement (ICC = 0.854, p < 0.001). Convergent validity showed moderate positive correlations between VAGUS-SR, VAGUS-CR, and BIS total scores. The VAGUS-SR and VAGUS-CR are brief and valid tools for assessing insight in Arabic-speaking patients with schizophrenia. Their value is particularly notable given the scarcity of such tools within the Arabic population.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Carl Jalkh
Chadia Haddad
Hala Sacre
Scientific Reports
Inserm
Institut de Recherche pour le Développement
Université de Limoges
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Jalkh et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69ada8a1bc08abd80d5bbca7 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42930-0