On Dimensionality, Measurement Invariance, and Suitability of Sum Scores for the PHQ-9 and the GAD-7

Author:

Stochl Jan123ORCID,Fried Eiko I.4,Fritz Jessica1,Croudace Tim J.5ORCID,Russo Debra A.1,Knight Clare1,Jones Peter B.12,Perez Jesus12

Affiliation:

1. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

2. National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East of England, Cambridge, UK

3. Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

4. Leiden University, Leiden, Zuid-Holland, Netherlands

5. University of Dundee, Dundee, UK

Abstract

In psychiatry, severity of mental health conditions and their change over time are usually measured via sum scores of items on psychometric scales. However, inferences from such scores can be biased if psychometric properties such as unidimensionality and temporal measurement invariance for instruments are not met. Here, we aimed to evaluate these properties for common measures of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire–9) and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder Assessment–7) in a large clinical sample ( N = 22,362) undergoing psychotherapy. In addition, we tested consistency in dimensionality results across different methods (parallel analysis, factor analysis, explained common variance, the partial credit model, and the Mokken model). Results showed that while both Patient Health Questionnaire–9 and Generalized Anxiety Disorder Assessment–7 are multidimensional instruments with highly correlated factors, there is justification for sum scores as measures of severity. Temporal measurement invariance across 10 therapy sessions was evaluated. Strict temporal measurement invariance was established in both scales, allowing researchers to compare sum scores as severity measures across time.

Funder

Pinsent Darwin Fund

Programme Grants for Applied Research

medical research council

national institute for health research

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Applied Psychology,Clinical Psychology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3