Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 1/2020

09-10-2019

Psychometric validation of PROMIS® Anxiety and Depression Item Banks for the Brazilian population

Auteurs: Natália Fontes Caputo de Castro, Rogério de Melo Costa Pinto, Tânia Maria da Silva Mendonça, Carlos Henrique Martins da Silva

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 1/2020

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

Scientific evidence indicates that depression and anxiety symptoms may be understood as risk factors associated with the incidence and progression of chronic diseases. Considering the lack of mental health assessment tools that meet strict methodological standards, the authors have chosen to validate the psychometric properties of Anxiety and Depression Item Banks - Emotional Distress domain of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) for the Brazilian population.

Methods

In this study, 606 adults responded to the self-administered Anxiety and Depression Item Banks, which were calibrated using Factor Analyses (Exploratory and Confirmatory analysis) and adjustment of the Graded Response Model. Transcultural validity was assessed by Differential Item Functioning (DIF).

Results

The two-factor analysis confirmed the unidimensionality of Emotional Distress Items (CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.05). The residual correlation matrix did not identify item pairs with local dependence. Indicators marked with DIF presented a low impact for gender, age, and language variables. The instrument demonstrated greater reliability in the moderate-severe range, indicating that the error reduction is reflected in the − 1.0 to + 3.0 amplitude.

Conclusion

The psychometric measurements of Anxiety and Depression Item Banks in the Brazilian version were equivalent to those in the original version. Additional research contemplating patients with different levels of emotional distress are necessary to better comprehend the results obtained in this study.
vorige artikel Reliability and validity of PROMIS® pediatric family relationships short form in children 8–17 years of age with chronic disease
volgende artikel A comparison of computer adaptive tests (CATs) and short forms in terms of accuracy and number of items administrated using PROMIS profile
Literatuur
1.
Doward, L. C., & McKenna, S. P. (2004). Defining patient-reported outcomes. Value in Health,7(Suppl 1), S4–S8.CrossRef
2.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, & FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health. (2006). Guide for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims: Draft guidance. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes,4, 79.CrossRef
3.
Ader, D. N. (2007). Developing the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Medical Care,45(5 Suppl 1), S1–S2.CrossRef
4.
Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., et al. (2007). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH Roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Medical Care,45(5 Suppl 1), 3–11.CrossRef
5.
Cella, D., Riley, W., Stone, A., Rothrock, N., Reeve, B., Yount, S., et al. (2010). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,63(11), 1179–1194.CrossRef
6.
Pilkonis, P. A., Choi, S. W., Reise, S. P., Stover, A. M., Riley, W. T., Cella, D., et al. (2011). Item banks for measuring emotional distress from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®): Depression, anxiety, and anger. Assessment,18(3), 263–283.CrossRef
7.
8.
Riley, W. T., Pilkonis, P. A., & Cella, D. (2011). Application of the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) to Mental Health Research. The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics,14(4), 201–208.PubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Promis Cooperative Group. (2008). Unpublished manual for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) (Version 1.1). Retrieved 5 Aug, 2018, from https://​www.​nihpromis.​org.
10.
Chang, C. H. (2007). Patient-reported outcomes measurement and management with innovative methodologies and technologies. Quality of Life Research,16(Suppl 1), 157–166.CrossRef
11.
DeWalt, D. A., Rothrock, N., Yount, S., & Stone, A. A. (2007). Evaluation of item candidates: The PROMIS qualitative item review. Medical Care,45(5 Suppl 1), S12–S21.CrossRef
12.
Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: Plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Medical Care,45(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31.CrossRef
13.
Gibbons, R. D., Clark, D. C., Cavanaugh, S. A., & Davis, J. M. (1985). Application of modern psychometric theory in psychiatric research. Journal of Psychiatric Research,19(1), 43–55.CrossRef
14.
Bernstein, I. H., Rush, A. J., Thomas, C. J., Woo, A., & Trivedi, M. H. (2006). Item response analysis of the inventory of depressive symptomatology. Neuropsychiatry Disease and Treatment,2(4), 557–564.CrossRef
15.
Kendel, F., Wirtz, M., Dunkel, A., Lehmkuhl, E., Hetzer, R., & Regitz-Zagrosek, V. (2010). Screening for depression: Rasch analysis of the dimensional structure of the PHQ-9 and the HAD-S. Journal of Affective Disorders,122(3), 241–246.CrossRef
16.
Castro, S. M. J., Trendini, C., & Riboldi, J. (2010). Teoria da resposta ao item aplicada ao Inventário de Depressão Beck. Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia,13(3), 487–501.CrossRef
17.
Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
Embreston, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19.
Pasquali, L. (2007). Teoria de Resposta ao Item: Teoria, procedimentos e aplicações. Brasília: LabPAM, UNB.
20.
Bjorner, J. B., Chang, C. H., Thissen, D., & Reeve, B. B. (2007). Developing tailored instruments: Item baking and computerized adaptive assessment. Quality of Life Research,16(Suppl 1), 95–108.CrossRef
21.
Thissen, D., Reeve, B. B., Bjorner, J. B., & Chang, C. H. (2007). Methodological issues for building item banks and computerized adaptive scales. Quality of Life Research,16(Suppl 1), 109–119.CrossRef
22.
Gibbons, R. D., Weiss, D. J., Kupfer, D. J., Frank, E., Fagiolini, A., & Grochocinski, V. J. (2008). Using computerized adaptive testing to reduce the burden of mental health assessment. Psychiatric Services,59(4), 361–368.CrossRef
23.
Gibbons, R. D., Weiss, D. J., Frank, E., & Kupfer, D. (2016). Computerized adaptive diagnosis and testing mental health disorders. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology,12, 83–104.CrossRef
24.
25.
Castro, N. F. C., Rezende, C. H. A., Mendonça, T. M. S., Silva, C. H. M., & Pinto, R. M. C. (2014). Adaptação Transcultural dos Bancos de Itens de Ansiedade e Depressão do Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) para a língua portuguesa. Cadernos de Saúde Pública,30(4), 879–884.CrossRef
26.
Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., et al. (2012). The COSMIN checklist manual. Amsterdam Public Health. Retrieved 5 Aug, 2018, from https://​www.​cosmin.​nl.
27.
Timmerman, M. E., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2011). Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychological Methods,16(2), 209–220.CrossRef
28.
Baglin, J. (2014). Improving your exploratory factor analysis for ordinal data: A demonstration Using FACTOR. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation,19(5), 1–15.
29.
Chen, F. F., West, S. G., & Sousa, K. H. (2006). A comparison of bifactor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research,41(2), 189–225.CrossRef
30.
Reise, S. P., Morizot, J., & Hays, R. D. (2007). The role of the bifator model resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures. Quality of Life Research,16(Suppl 1), 19–31.CrossRef
31.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Pearson.
32.
Samejima, F. (1968). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Princenton: Educational Testing Service.
33.
McHorney, C. A., Ware, J. E., Jr., Lu, J. F., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1994). The MOS 36 item short-form healthy survey (SF-36): III. Test of data quality, scaling assumptions and reliability across diverse patient groups. Medical Care,32(1), 40–66.CrossRef
34.
Thissen, D., Chen, W. H., & Bock, R. D. (2003). MULTILOG (version 7) [computer software]. Lincolnwood: Scientifics Software International.
35.
Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (1993). Differential item functioning. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36.
Nagelkerke, N. J. D. (1991). A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika,78(3), 691–692.CrossRef
37.
38.
Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF): Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and liket-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.
39.
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Fernando, P. J. (2006). FACTOR: A computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavior Research Methods,38(1), 88–91.CrossRef
40.
Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2006). Mplus user´s guide (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen.
41.
Choi, S. W., Gibbons, L. E., & Crane, P. K. (2011). lordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and monte carlo simulations. Journal of Statistical Software,39(8), 1–30.CrossRef
42.
43.
Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.
Metagegevens
Titel
Psychometric validation of PROMIS® Anxiety and Depression Item Banks for the Brazilian population
Auteurs
Natália Fontes Caputo de Castro
Rogério de Melo Costa Pinto
Tânia Maria da Silva Mendonça
Carlos Henrique Martins da Silva
Publicatiedatum
09-10-2019
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 1/2020
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02319-1

Andere artikelen Uitgave 1/2020

Quality of Life Research 1/2020 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

A comparison of computer adaptive tests (CATs) and short forms in terms of accuracy and number of items administrated using PROMIS profile

OriginalPaper

Orthostatic hypotension and health-related quality of life among community-living older people in Korea

Review

Outcome measurement instruments for peripheral vascular malformations and an assessment of the measurement properties: a systematic review

OriginalPaper

Quality of life in nursing home residents with pain: pain interference, depression and multiple pain-related diseases as important determinants

OriginalPaper

Mapping EQ-5D-3L from the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)

OriginalPaper

Parental perception of child health status and quality of life associated with overweight and obesity in early childhood