What question did this study set out to answer?

To assess the effectiveness of the M-FAST and ATP scales in identifying those who do not need further symptom validity testing.

April 16, 2026Open Access

Are feigning screens “competent to stand trial”? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test, Atypical Presentation Scales, and Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology.

Puntos clave

To assess the effectiveness of the M-FAST and ATP scales in identifying those who do not need further symptom validity testing.
Systematic review of existing literature
Meta-analysis of M-FAST and ATP scale effectiveness
Evaluation of false positive rates
M-FAST and ATP scales effectively identify examinees needing no further testing
Elevated false positive rates warrant follow-up assessments for positive results
Overall competence assessment necessity is highlighted for trial readiness

Resumen

Both the M-FAST and ATP Scales appear to be effective screening tools for identifying examinees who do not require further symptom validity testing. However, considering the elevated false positive rate, positive results necessitate follow-up assessment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Preguntar a la IA

Me gusta

Guardar

Ver artículo completo