Manjunatha B Kondapura, Narayana Manjunatha, Anil Kumar M Nagaraj, Samir K Praharaj, Channaveerachari Naveen Kumar, Suresh Bada Math
{"title":"印度残疾评估和评定量表 \"与 \"希恩残疾量表 \"在常见精神障碍患者中的并发有效性横断面研究。","authors":"Manjunatha B Kondapura, Narayana Manjunatha, Anil Kumar M Nagaraj, Samir K Praharaj, Channaveerachari Naveen Kumar, Suresh Bada Math","doi":"10.1177/02537176241281320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Worldwide, common mental disorders (CMDs) (depression, anxiety, somatoform disorders) have a high prevalence in the community. About one-third of them experience disability. As the Indian Disability Evaluation and Assessment Scale (IDEAS) was originally designed by the Indian Psychiatric Society to assess disability in severe mental illnesses, it has not been widely used among CMDs. Our objective was to compare and establish a correlation between the level of disability obtained using IDEAS and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) in CMDs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional assessment of disability was performed among 220 consenting patients with CMDs. Disability scores of IDEAS and SDS were compared and correlated across the three varieties of CMDs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Age, gender, education, socioeconomic class, duration of illness, and duration of treatment exhibited significant differences among the three CMD groups. Both IDEAS and SDS show a milder level of disability; they did not differ significantly in their scores across CMDs. A strong correlation was seen between SDS and IDEAS across most domains.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study revealed strong concurrent validity between the two scales, thus advocating that indigenously designed IDEAS can convincingly assess disability across the CMDs among the Indian population.</p>","PeriodicalId":13476,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"02537176241281320"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11572470/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Cross-Sectional Study of Concurrent Validity of the \\\"Indian Disability Evaluation and Assessment Scale\\\" with the \\\"Sheehan Disability Scale\\\" in Patients with Common Mental Disorders.\",\"authors\":\"Manjunatha B Kondapura, Narayana Manjunatha, Anil Kumar M Nagaraj, Samir K Praharaj, Channaveerachari Naveen Kumar, Suresh Bada Math\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02537176241281320\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Worldwide, common mental disorders (CMDs) (depression, anxiety, somatoform disorders) have a high prevalence in the community. About one-third of them experience disability. As the Indian Disability Evaluation and Assessment Scale (IDEAS) was originally designed by the Indian Psychiatric Society to assess disability in severe mental illnesses, it has not been widely used among CMDs. Our objective was to compare and establish a correlation between the level of disability obtained using IDEAS and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) in CMDs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional assessment of disability was performed among 220 consenting patients with CMDs. Disability scores of IDEAS and SDS were compared and correlated across the three varieties of CMDs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Age, gender, education, socioeconomic class, duration of illness, and duration of treatment exhibited significant differences among the three CMD groups. Both IDEAS and SDS show a milder level of disability; they did not differ significantly in their scores across CMDs. A strong correlation was seen between SDS and IDEAS across most domains.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study revealed strong concurrent validity between the two scales, thus advocating that indigenously designed IDEAS can convincingly assess disability across the CMDs among the Indian population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"02537176241281320\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11572470/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02537176241281320\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02537176241281320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Cross-Sectional Study of Concurrent Validity of the "Indian Disability Evaluation and Assessment Scale" with the "Sheehan Disability Scale" in Patients with Common Mental Disorders.
Background: Worldwide, common mental disorders (CMDs) (depression, anxiety, somatoform disorders) have a high prevalence in the community. About one-third of them experience disability. As the Indian Disability Evaluation and Assessment Scale (IDEAS) was originally designed by the Indian Psychiatric Society to assess disability in severe mental illnesses, it has not been widely used among CMDs. Our objective was to compare and establish a correlation between the level of disability obtained using IDEAS and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) in CMDs.
Methods: A cross-sectional assessment of disability was performed among 220 consenting patients with CMDs. Disability scores of IDEAS and SDS were compared and correlated across the three varieties of CMDs.
Results: Age, gender, education, socioeconomic class, duration of illness, and duration of treatment exhibited significant differences among the three CMD groups. Both IDEAS and SDS show a milder level of disability; they did not differ significantly in their scores across CMDs. A strong correlation was seen between SDS and IDEAS across most domains.
Conclusion: The study revealed strong concurrent validity between the two scales, thus advocating that indigenously designed IDEAS can convincingly assess disability across the CMDs among the Indian population.
期刊介绍:
The Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine (ISSN 0253-7176) was started in 1978 as the official publication of the Indian Psychiatric Society South Zonal Branch. The journal allows free access (Open Access) and is published Bimonthly. The Journal includes but is not limited to review articles, original research, opinions, and letters. The Editor and publisher accept no legal responsibility for any opinions, omissions or errors by the authors, nor do they approve of any product advertised within the journal.