Tính invariance trong đo lường của Bảng câu hỏi sức khỏe bệnh nhân (PHQ-9) và thang đo lo âu tổng quát (GAD-7) qua bốn quốc gia châu Âu trong thời gian đại dịch COVID-19
Tóm tắt
Bảng câu hỏi sức khỏe bệnh nhân (PHQ-9) và thang đo lo âu tổng quát (GAD-7) là những thước đo tự báo cáo về rối loạn trầm cảm chính và rối loạn lo âu tổng quát. Mục tiêu chính của nghiên cứu này là kiểm tra chức năng khác biệt của từng mục (DIF) trên các mục PHQ-9 và GAD-7 dựa trên độ tuổi, giới tính (nam và nữ) và quốc gia.
Dữ liệu từ các khảo sát đại diện quốc gia ở Vương quốc Anh, Ireland, Tây Ban Nha và Ý (tổng hợp
Tây Ban Nha và Ý có giá trị trung bình biến tiềm ẩn cao hơn so với Vương quốc Anh và Ireland cả về lo âu và trầm cảm, nhưng không có bằng chứng cho chức năng khác biệt của các mục.
Các điểm số PHQ-9 và GAD-7 được tìm thấy là đơn chiều, đáng tin cậy và hầu như không có DIF trong dữ liệu từ bốn mẫu lớn đại diện quốc gia của dân số chung ở Vương quốc Anh, Ireland, Ý và Tây Ban Nha.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(9):606–13. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x.
Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Löwe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(10):1092–7. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092.
Richardson T, Wrightman M, Yeebo M, Lisicka A. Reliability and score ranges of the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 in a primary and secondary care mental health service. Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation and Mental Health. 2017;4(2):237–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40737-017-0090-0.
National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health. The improving access to psychological therapies manual. 2018. Available at https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/the-improving-access-to-psychological-therapies-manual/
Arias-de la Torre J, Vilagut G, Ronaldson A, Serrano-Blanco A, Martín V, Peters M. Prevalence and variability of current depressive disorder in 27 European countries: a population-based study. The Lancet Public Health. 2021;6(10):E729–38.
Karatzias T, Hyland P, Bradley A, Cloitre M, Roberts NP, Bisson JI, et al. Risk factors and comorbidity of ICD-11 PTSD and complex PTSD: Findings from a trauma‐exposed population based sample of adults in the United Kingdom. Depress Anxiety. 2019;36(9):887–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22934
Fancourt D, Steptoe A, Bu F. Trajectories of anxiety and depressive symptoms during enforced isolation due to COVID-19 in England: A longitudinal observational study. Lancet Psychiatry. 2021;8(2):141–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30482-X
McBride O, Murphy J, Shevlin M, Gibson-Miller J, Hartman TK, Hyland P, et al. Monitoring the psychological, social, and economic impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic in the population: Context, design and conduct of the longitudinal COVID‐19 psychological research consortium (C19PRC) study. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2021;30(1):e1861. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1861.
Pieh C, Budimir S, Delgadillo J, Barkham M, Fontaine JR, Probst T. Mental health during COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom. Psychosom Med. 2021;83(4):328–37. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000871
Shevlin M, McBride O, Murphy J, Miller JG, Hartman TK, Levita L, et al. Anxiety, depression, traumatic stress, and COVID-19 related anxiety in the UK general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. BJPsych Open. 2020;6(6):e125. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2020.109
Castaldelli-Maia JM, Marziali ME, Lu Z, Martins SS. Investigating the effect of national government physical distancing measures on depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic through meta-analysis and meta-regression. Psychological Medicine. 2021;51(6):881–93. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721000933
Meredith W. Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika. 1993;58(4):525–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294825
Teymoori A, Real R, Gorbunova A, Haghish E, Andelic N, Wilson L, et al. Measurement invariance of assessments of depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) across sex, strata and linguistic backgrounds in a European-wide sample of patients after Traumatic Brain Injury. J Affect Disord. 2020;262:278–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.10.035
Rutter LA, Brown TA. Psychometric properties of the generalized anxiety disorder scale-7 (GAD-7) in outpatients with anxiety and mood disorders. Journal of psychopathology and behavioral assessment. 2017;39(1):140–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-016-9571-9
Zhang C, Wang T, Zeng P, Zhao M, Zhang G, Zhai S, et al. Reliability, Validity, and Measurement Invariance of the General Anxiety Disorder Scale Among Chinese Medical University Students. Frontiers in psychiatry. 2021;12:750. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.648755
Lamela D, Soreira C, Matos P, Morais A. Systematic review of the factor structure and measurement invariance of the patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and validation of the Portuguese version in community settings. J Affect Disord. 2020;276:220–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.06.066
González-Blanch C, Medrano LA, Muñoz-Navarro R, Ruíz-Rodríguez P, Moriana JA, Limonero JT, et al. Factor structure and measurement invariance across various demographic groups and over time for the PHQ-9 in primary care patients in Spain. PloS one. 2018;13(2):e0193356. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193356
Elis B. Differential item functioning: Implication for test translation. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1989;74(6):912–21. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.6.912
Teresi JA. Different approaches to differential item functioning in health applications: Advantages, disadvantages and some neglected topics. Medical Care. 2006;44(11):S152-S70. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000245142.74628.ab
Zumbo BD. Three generations of DIF analyses: Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going. Language assessment quarterly. 2007;4(2):223–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300701375832
Jöreskog KG, Goldberger AS. Estimation of a model with multiple indicators and multiple causes of a single latent variable. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1975;70(351a):631–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1975.10482485
MacIntosh R, Hashim S. Variance estimation for converting MIMIC model parameters to IRT parameters in DIF analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement. 2003;27(5):372–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621603256021
Spikol E, McBride O, Vallières F, Butter S, Hyland P. Tracking the Irish adult population during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: A methodological report of the COVID-19 psychological research consortium (C19PRC) study in Ireland. Acta Psychologica. 2021;220:103416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103416.
Valiente C, Contreras A, Peinado V, Trucharte A, Martínez AP, Vázquez C. Psychological adjustment in Spain during the COVID-19 pandemic: positive and negative mental health outcomes in the general population. The Spanish Journal of Psychology. 2021;24:E8. https://doi.org/10.1017/SJP.2021
Bruno G, Panzeri A, Granziol U, Alivernini F, Chirico A, Galli F, et al. The Italian COVID-19 psychological research consortium (IT C19PRC): general overview and replication of the UK study. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021;10(1):52. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10010052
Manea L, Gilbody S, McMillan D. Optimal cut-off score for diagnosing depression with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9): a meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2012;184(3):E191-E6.
Hinz A, Klein AM, Brahler E, Glaesmer H, Luck T, Riedel-Heller SG, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener GAD-7, based on a large German general population sample. Journal of affective disorders. 2017;210:338–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.12.012
Pfizer. Patient Health Screeners No date [Accessed 23 September 2021]. Available from: https://www.phqscreeners.com/select-screener.
Chou C-P, Bentler P. Invariant standardized estimated parameter change for model modification in covariance structure analysis. Multivariate behavioral research. 1993;28(1):97–110. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2801_6.
Saris WE, Satorra A, Sörbom D. The detection and correction of specification errors in structural equation models. Sociol Methodol. 1987;17:105–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/271030
Chou C-P, Bentler PM. Model modification in covariance structure modeling: A comparison among likelihood ratio, Lagrange multiplier, and Wald tests. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1990;25(1):115–36. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2501_13
Kaplan D. Model modification in covariance structure analysis: Application of the expected parameter change statistic. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1989;24(3):285–305. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2403_2.
Muthén LK, Muthén B. Mplus user’s guide: Statistical analysis with latent variables, user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 2017.
Yuan K-H, Bentler PM. Three likelihood-based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociol Methodol. 2000;30(1):165–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/0081-1750.00078
Bentler PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological bulletin. 1990;107(2):238–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.
Tucker LR, Lewis C. A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika. 1973;38(1):1–10 10.1007/BF02291170.
Steiger JH. Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1990;25(2):173–80 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4
JÓ§reskog K, SÓ§rbom D. LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software. 1996.
Chen FF. Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct Equ Modeling. 2007;14(3):464–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
Tanaka JS. " How big is big enough?“: Sample size and goodness of fit in structural equation models with latent variables. Child Development. 1987;58:134–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130296
Moreno E, Muñoz-Navarro R, Medrano LA, González-Blanch C, Ruiz-Rodríguez P, Limonero JT, et al. Factorial invariance of a computerized version of the GAD-7 across various demographic groups and over time in primary care patients. J Affect Disord. 2019;252:114–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.04.032