Identifying levels of general distress in first line mental health services

Autor: Berend Terluin, Bart Schrieken, Rob R. Meijer, Lex Wunderink, Jan van Bebber, Sjoerd Sytema, Marieke Wichers, Johanna T. W. Wigman, Jorge N. Tendeiro, Janneke Broeksteeg
Přispěvatelé: General practice, APH - Mental Health, APH - Aging & Later Life, Interdisciplinary Centre Psychopathology and Emotion regulation (ICPE), Psychometrics and Statistics, Clinical Cognitive Neuropsychiatry Research Program (CCNP)
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2017
Předmět:
Male
Psychometrics
General Practice
Anxiety
0302 clinical medicine
lcsh:Psychiatry
Item response theory
030212 general & internal medicine
Child
Somatoform Disorders
VERSION
POPULATION
Netherlands
Aged
80 and over

education.field_of_study
Depression
05 social sciences
Middle Aged
SYMPTOM QUESTIONNAIRE 4DSQ
Telemedicine
Psychiatry and Mental health
Distress
RELIABILITY
Female
medicine.symptom
Psychology
Research Article
Clinical psychology
Adult
Mental Health Services
Adolescent
lcsh:RC435-571
NORMATIVE DATA
Population
ITEM RESPONSE THEORY
Diagnosis
Differential

Young Adult
03 medical and health sciences
0502 economics and business
eHealth
medicine
Journal Article
Humans
VALIDITY
education
Aged
Reproducibility of Results
medicine.disease
Mental health
Self Report
Somatization
Stress
Psychological

050203 business & management
Zdroj: van Bebber, J, Wigman, J T W, Wunderink, L, Tendeiro, J N, Wichers, M, Broeksteeg, J, Schrieken, B, Sytema, S, Terluin, B & Meijer, R R 2017, ' Identifying levels of general distress in first line mental health services : can GP-and eHealth clients' scores be meaningfully compared? ', BMC Psychiatry, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 382 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-1552-3
BMC Psychiatry, 17(1). BioMed Central
BMC Psychiatry
BMC Psychiatry, 17(1):382. BMC
BMC Psychiatry, Vol 17, Iss 1, Pp 1-9 (2017)
ISSN: 1471-244X
DOI: 10.1186/s12888-017-1552-3
Popis: Background The Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ) (Huisarts Wetenschap 39: 538–47, 1996) is a self-report questionnaire developed in the Netherlands to distinguish non-specific general distress from depression, anxiety, and somatization. This questionnaire is often used in different populations and settings and there is a paper-and-pencil and computerized version. Methods We used item response theory to investigate whether the 4DSQ measures the same construct (structural equivalence) in the same way (scalar equivalence) in two samples comprised of primary mental health care attendees: (i) clients who visited their General Practitioner responded to the 4DSQ paper-and-pencil version, and (ii) eHealth clients responded to the 4DSQ computerized version. Specifically, we investigated whether the distress items functioned differently in eHealth clients compared to General Practitioners’ clients and whether these differences lead to substantial differences at scale level. Results Results showed that in general structural equivalence holds for the distress scale. This means that the distress scale measures the same construct in both General Practitioners’ clients and eHealth clients. Furthermore, although eHealth clients have higher observed distress scores than General Practitioners’ clients, application of a multiple group generalized partial credit response model suggests that scalar equivalence holds. Conclusions The same cutoff scores can be used for classifying respondents as having low, moderate and high levels of distress in both settings. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12888-017-1552-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Databáze: OpenAIRE