[Factorial and Convergent Validity of the Short Form of the "Questionnaire of Thoughts and Feelings" (QTF-14) for Borderline Personality Disorder].

IF 0.7 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-06 DOI:10.1055/a-2177-1676
Brigitte Dippold, Johannes Beller, Christoph Kröger, Kathrin Dreyße
{"title":"[Factorial and Convergent Validity of the Short Form of the \"Questionnaire of Thoughts and Feelings\" (QTF-14) for Borderline Personality Disorder].","authors":"Brigitte Dippold, Johannes Beller, Christoph Kröger, Kathrin Dreyße","doi":"10.1055/a-2177-1676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The \"Questionnaire of Thoughts and Feelings\" (QTF) is being used as screening instrument as well as tool for treatment planning and treatment evaluation for patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). The primary goal of this study was the validation of the dimensional structure of the short version with 14 items, QTF-14. Additionally, item characteristics, reliability and evidence of convergent validity were examined. A diagnostically homogenous sample of patients with BPD (N=3035) of a psychosomatic clinic was presented with several self-assessment inventories, including the QTF-14. The expected single-factor model of the structure of the FGG showed unacceptable model fit indices (CFI=0.751; TLI=0.706; RMSEA=0.115; SRMR=0.073). Exploratory factor analysis showed evidence of two or three specific factors. In a subsequent confirmatory factor analysis, a bifactor model with two specific factors proved to be preferable (CFI=0.956; TLI=0.936; RMSEA=0.054; SRMR=0.034). The internal consistency of the total scale as well as the suggested subscales \"Relationship Difficulties and Emotional Dysregulation\" and \"Autoaggression\" was acceptable to good (ω=.81-.84; α=.79-.85). Associations with similar scales were as expected. Good psychometric properties of the QTF-14 can be confirmed in this study. Using the suggested subscales could support treatment planning.</p>","PeriodicalId":47315,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2177-1676","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The "Questionnaire of Thoughts and Feelings" (QTF) is being used as screening instrument as well as tool for treatment planning and treatment evaluation for patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). The primary goal of this study was the validation of the dimensional structure of the short version with 14 items, QTF-14. Additionally, item characteristics, reliability and evidence of convergent validity were examined. A diagnostically homogenous sample of patients with BPD (N=3035) of a psychosomatic clinic was presented with several self-assessment inventories, including the QTF-14. The expected single-factor model of the structure of the FGG showed unacceptable model fit indices (CFI=0.751; TLI=0.706; RMSEA=0.115; SRMR=0.073). Exploratory factor analysis showed evidence of two or three specific factors. In a subsequent confirmatory factor analysis, a bifactor model with two specific factors proved to be preferable (CFI=0.956; TLI=0.936; RMSEA=0.054; SRMR=0.034). The internal consistency of the total scale as well as the suggested subscales "Relationship Difficulties and Emotional Dysregulation" and "Autoaggression" was acceptable to good (ω=.81-.84; α=.79-.85). Associations with similar scales were as expected. Good psychometric properties of the QTF-14 can be confirmed in this study. Using the suggested subscales could support treatment planning.

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
[“思想情感问卷”(QTF-14)对边缘型人格障碍的因子和聚合有效性]。
“思想和感觉问卷”(QTF)被用作筛选工具,以及边缘型人格障碍(BPD)患者的治疗计划和治疗评估工具。本研究的主要目标是验证具有14个项目的短版本QTF-14的尺寸结构。此外,还检验了项目特征、信度和收敛有效性的证据。对一家心身诊所的BPD患者(N=3035)的诊断同质样本进行了多项自我评估,包括QTF-14。FGG结构的预期单因素模型显示出不可接受的模型拟合指数(CFI=0.751;TLI=0.706;RMSEA=0.115;SRMR=0.073)。探索性因素分析显示有两个或三个特定因素的证据。在随后的验证性因素分析中,具有两个特定因素的双因子模型被证明是优选的(CFI=0.956;TLI=0.936;RMSEA=0.054;SRMR=0.034)。总量表以及建议的分量表“关系困难和情绪调节障碍”和“自主性”的内部一致性是可以接受的(ω=.81-.84;α=.79-.85)。具有相似量表的关联性是预期的。QTF-14良好的心理测量特性可以在本研究中得到证实。使用建议的分量表可以支持治疗计划。
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
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
11.10%
发文量
89
期刊最新文献
[Learning Evidence-Based Practice - Multi-Perspective Competence Development using the Example of Generalised Anxiety Disorder]. [Utilization of Psychosocial Support for Young Adults with Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors]. [Partnership Status And Prevalence Of Mental Disorders In Women And Men With Cancer]. [Young Adult Cancer Patients (AYA): Preferences for Outpatient Psychosocial Care and Gender-Specific Differences - Results from the AYA-LE study]. [Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy (QCAE)].
×
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学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
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