Comparative study of the pencil-and-paper and digital formats of the Spanish DARS scale.

Abstract

The Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS) is a novel questionnaire to assess anhedonia of recent validation. In this work, we aim to study the equivalence between the traditional paper-and-pencil and the digital format of DARS. Sixty-nine patients filled the DARS in a paper-based and digital versions. We assessed differences between formats (Wilcoxon test), validity of the scales [Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs)], and reliability (Cronbach's alpha and Guttman's coefficient). We calculated the comparative fit index and the root mean squared error (RMSE) associated with the proposed one-factor structure. Total scores were higher for paper-based format. Significant differences between both formats were found for three items. The weighted Kappa coefficient was approximately 0.40 for most of the items. Internal consistency was greater than 0.94, and the ICC for the digital version was 0.95 and 0.94 for the paper-and-pencil version (F = 16.7, p < 0.001). Comparative Adjustment Index was 0.97 for the digital DARS and 0.97 for the paper-and-pencil DARS, and RMSE was 0.11 for the digital DARS and 0.10 for the paper-and-pencil DARS. We concluded that the digital DARS is consistent in many respects with the paper-and-pencil questionnaire, but equivalence with this format cannot be assumed without caution.