Validating the German version of the entrapment scale among suicidal psychiatric inpatients

Q3 Psychology Journal of Affective Disorders Reports Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-15 DOI:10.1016/j.jadr.2024.100862
Emmy Wichelhaus , Dajana Schreiber , Laura Paashaus , Antje Schönfelder , Georg Juckel , Heide Glaesmer , Tobias Teismann , Thomas Forkmann
{"title":"Validating the German version of the entrapment scale among suicidal psychiatric inpatients","authors":"Emmy Wichelhaus ,&nbsp;Dajana Schreiber ,&nbsp;Laura Paashaus ,&nbsp;Antje Schönfelder ,&nbsp;Georg Juckel ,&nbsp;Heide Glaesmer ,&nbsp;Tobias Teismann ,&nbsp;Thomas Forkmann","doi":"10.1016/j.jadr.2024.100862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Entrapment, the feeling of being trapped by external (EE) or internal (IE) circumstances, is an important transdiagnostic construct that is associated with both the development of depressiveness and suicide ideation. Entrapment can be validly assessed by the original English version of the Entrapment Scale (ES). So far, the German version of the Entrapment Scale has been psychometrically examined only once and exclusively in a non-clinical sample. In the present study we therefore examined whether the German version of the Entrapment Scale (ES-d) is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring entrapment in a clinical sample.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The study represents a secondary analysis of a large multicentre project that investigated risk factors for suicide ideation and suicidal behaviour in a longitudinal design. The analyses are based on data from 287 patients who were admitted to hospital for a recent suicide attempt or an acute suicidal crisis. The factorial validity of the ES-d is tested by means of a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The internal consistency of the scale as well as its retest reliability are reported. Convergent validity (DESC, BSS, BHS), discriminant validity (PMH), and predictive validity with regard to suicide ideation and depression were examined at 6-month follow-up.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The results confirm the two-factorial structure of ES-d, after three items were removed from the scale with a good internal consistency for external entrapment (EE: α = 0.84) as well as internal entrapment (IE: α = 0.85). The ES-d also showed good convergent (EE-DESC: r = 0.537. EE-BSS: r = 0.438, EE-BHS: r = 0.447; IE-DESC: r = 0.618, IE-BSS: r = 0.472, IE-BHS: r = 0.528) and discriminant (EE: r = -0.459, IE: r= -0.531) validity. Both the retest reliability (ES-d: r = 0.26, EE: r = 0.26, IE: r = 0.27) and the predictive validity prove to be low.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>The two-factorial structure of the Entrapment Scale was confirmed, however challenging the results of the previous validation of the German version, which had previously reported a single-factor structure of the scale based on a non-clinical sample. The German version of the Entrapment Scale is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring entrapment in a high-risk population.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":52768,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Affective Disorders Reports","volume":"19 ","pages":"Article 100862"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Affective Disorders Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666915324001483","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Entrapment, the feeling of being trapped by external (EE) or internal (IE) circumstances, is an important transdiagnostic construct that is associated with both the development of depressiveness and suicide ideation. Entrapment can be validly assessed by the original English version of the Entrapment Scale (ES). So far, the German version of the Entrapment Scale has been psychometrically examined only once and exclusively in a non-clinical sample. In the present study we therefore examined whether the German version of the Entrapment Scale (ES-d) is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring entrapment in a clinical sample.

Methods

The study represents a secondary analysis of a large multicentre project that investigated risk factors for suicide ideation and suicidal behaviour in a longitudinal design. The analyses are based on data from 287 patients who were admitted to hospital for a recent suicide attempt or an acute suicidal crisis. The factorial validity of the ES-d is tested by means of a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The internal consistency of the scale as well as its retest reliability are reported. Convergent validity (DESC, BSS, BHS), discriminant validity (PMH), and predictive validity with regard to suicide ideation and depression were examined at 6-month follow-up.

Results

The results confirm the two-factorial structure of ES-d, after three items were removed from the scale with a good internal consistency for external entrapment (EE: α = 0.84) as well as internal entrapment (IE: α = 0.85). The ES-d also showed good convergent (EE-DESC: r = 0.537. EE-BSS: r = 0.438, EE-BHS: r = 0.447; IE-DESC: r = 0.618, IE-BSS: r = 0.472, IE-BHS: r = 0.528) and discriminant (EE: r = -0.459, IE: r= -0.531) validity. Both the retest reliability (ES-d: r = 0.26, EE: r = 0.26, IE: r = 0.27) and the predictive validity prove to be low.

Discussion

The two-factorial structure of the Entrapment Scale was confirmed, however challenging the results of the previous validation of the German version, which had previously reported a single-factor structure of the scale based on a non-clinical sample. The German version of the Entrapment Scale is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring entrapment in a high-risk population.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自杀精神科住院病人德文版困住量表之验证
诱骗,即被外部(EE)或内部(IE)环境所困住的感觉,是一种重要的跨诊断结构,与抑郁和自杀意念的发展有关。诱捕行为可透过英文版的诱捕行为量表(ES)进行有效评估。到目前为止,德国版的诱捕量表只在非临床样本中进行过一次心理测量学检验。因此,在本研究中,我们检验了德文版本的夹持量表(ES-d)是否为临床样本中测量夹持的有效和可靠的工具。方法本研究是对一个大型多中心项目的二次分析,该项目在纵向设计中调查了自杀意念和自杀行为的危险因素。该分析基于287名因近期自杀未遂或急性自杀危机而入院的患者的数据。ES-d的析因效度通过验证性因子分析(CFA)进行测试。报告了量表的内部一致性和重测信度。随访6个月,对自杀意念和抑郁的趋同效度(DESC、BSS、BHS)、区别效度(PMH)和预测效度进行检测。结果结果证实了ES-d量表剔除3个条目后的二因子结构,其中外部夹持(EE: α = 0.84)和内部夹持(IE: α = 0.85)具有良好的内部一致性。ES-d也表现出较好的收敛性(EE-DESC: r = 0.537)。EE-BSS: r = 0.438, EE-BHS: r = 0.447;IE- desc效度:r= 0.618, IE- bss效度:r= 0.472, IE- bhs效度:r= 0.528)和判别效度(EE效度:r= -0.459, IE效度:r= -0.531)。重测信度(ES-d: r = 0.26, EE: r = 0.26, IE: r = 0.27)和预测效度均较低。讨论诱捕量表的双因子结构得到了证实,然而对先前德国版本验证的结果提出了挑战,德国版本先前报道了基于非临床样本的量表的单因素结构。德文版本的诱捕量表是一种有效和可靠的工具,用于测量高风险人群的诱捕。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Affective Disorders Reports
Journal of Affective Disorders Reports Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
137
审稿时长
134 days
期刊最新文献
Childhood maltreatment profiles and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) among female adolescents in Nigeria: A latent class analysis Augmentation strategies for transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in the treatment of unipolar depression: A scoping review The roles of neuroticism and schizotypy in emotional abuse and mental health association: a replication and extension of Alnassar et al. (2024) Variability exists across outcomes measured and reported in studies assessing interventions for generalized anxiety disorder during the perinatal period: A scoping review Perceived stigma and quality of life among people living with mental illness in Ethiopia: An institutional cross-sectional study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1