流行病学研究中心抑郁量表用于评估成人HIV/AIDS患者抑郁症状的心理测量局限性:皮疹分析

Q1 Psychology Depression Research and Treatment Pub Date : 2016-03-03 DOI:10.1155/2016/2824595
C. Gay, A. Kottorp, A. Lerdal, Kathryn A. Lee
{"title":"流行病学研究中心抑郁量表用于评估成人HIV/AIDS患者抑郁症状的心理测量局限性:皮疹分析","authors":"C. Gay, A. Kottorp, A. Lerdal, Kathryn A. Lee","doi":"10.1155/2016/2824595","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale is a widely used measure of depressive symptoms, but its psychometric properties have not been adequately evaluated among adults with HIV/AIDS. This study used an item response theory approach (Rasch analysis) to evaluate the CES-D's validity and reliability in relation to key demographic and clinical variables in adults with HIV/AIDS. A convenience sample of 347 adults with HIV/AIDS (231 males, 93 females, and 23 transgenders; age range 22–77 years) completed the CES-D. A Rasch model application was used to analyze the CES-D's rating scale functioning, internal scale validity, person-response validity, person-separation validity, internal consistency, differential item functioning (DIF), and differential test functioning. CES-D scores were generally high and associated with several demographic and clinical variables. The CES-D distinguished 3 distinct levels of depression and had acceptable internal consistency but lacked unidimensionality, five items demonstrated poor fit to the model, 15% of the respondents demonstrated poor fit, and eight items demonstrated DIF related to gender, race, or AIDS diagnosis. Removal of misfitting items resulted in minimal improvement in the CES-D's substantive and structural validity. CES-D scores should be interpreted with caution in adults with HIV/AIDS, particularly when comparing scores across gender and racial groups.","PeriodicalId":38441,"journal":{"name":"Depression Research and Treatment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/2824595","citationCount":"33","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric Limitations of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale for Assessing Depressive Symptoms among Adults with HIV/AIDS: A Rasch Analysis\",\"authors\":\"C. Gay, A. Kottorp, A. Lerdal, Kathryn A. Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2016/2824595\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale is a widely used measure of depressive symptoms, but its psychometric properties have not been adequately evaluated among adults with HIV/AIDS. This study used an item response theory approach (Rasch analysis) to evaluate the CES-D's validity and reliability in relation to key demographic and clinical variables in adults with HIV/AIDS. A convenience sample of 347 adults with HIV/AIDS (231 males, 93 females, and 23 transgenders; age range 22–77 years) completed the CES-D. A Rasch model application was used to analyze the CES-D's rating scale functioning, internal scale validity, person-response validity, person-separation validity, internal consistency, differential item functioning (DIF), and differential test functioning. CES-D scores were generally high and associated with several demographic and clinical variables. The CES-D distinguished 3 distinct levels of depression and had acceptable internal consistency but lacked unidimensionality, five items demonstrated poor fit to the model, 15% of the respondents demonstrated poor fit, and eight items demonstrated DIF related to gender, race, or AIDS diagnosis. Removal of misfitting items resulted in minimal improvement in the CES-D's substantive and structural validity. CES-D scores should be interpreted with caution in adults with HIV/AIDS, particularly when comparing scores across gender and racial groups.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Depression Research and Treatment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/2824595\",\"citationCount\":\"33\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Depression Research and Treatment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2824595\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Depression Research and Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2824595","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 33

摘要

流行病学研究中心抑郁量表(CES-D)是一种广泛使用的抑郁症状测量方法,但其心理测量特性尚未在成年艾滋病毒/艾滋病患者中得到充分评估。本研究采用项目反应理论方法(Rasch分析)来评估成人HIV/AIDS患者的CES-D在关键人口学和临床变量方面的效度和信度。方便样本为347名成年HIV/AIDS患者(231名男性,93名女性,23名变性人);年龄介乎22至77岁)完成了cse - d测试。采用Rasch模型分析ce - d量表功能、内部效度、人-反应效度、人-分离效度、内部一致性、差异项目功能(DIF)和差异测试功能。CES-D评分普遍较高,并与几个人口统计学和临床变量相关。ce - d区分了3个不同的抑郁水平,具有可接受的内部一致性,但缺乏单维性,5个项目与模型拟合不佳,15%的受访者表现为拟合不佳,8个项目表现出与性别、种族或艾滋病诊断相关的DIF。删除不合适的项目对CES-D的实质和结构有效性的改善微乎其微。在成人HIV/AIDS患者中,应谨慎解释CES-D分数,特别是在比较不同性别和种族群体的分数时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Psychometric Limitations of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale for Assessing Depressive Symptoms among Adults with HIV/AIDS: A Rasch Analysis
The Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale is a widely used measure of depressive symptoms, but its psychometric properties have not been adequately evaluated among adults with HIV/AIDS. This study used an item response theory approach (Rasch analysis) to evaluate the CES-D's validity and reliability in relation to key demographic and clinical variables in adults with HIV/AIDS. A convenience sample of 347 adults with HIV/AIDS (231 males, 93 females, and 23 transgenders; age range 22–77 years) completed the CES-D. A Rasch model application was used to analyze the CES-D's rating scale functioning, internal scale validity, person-response validity, person-separation validity, internal consistency, differential item functioning (DIF), and differential test functioning. CES-D scores were generally high and associated with several demographic and clinical variables. The CES-D distinguished 3 distinct levels of depression and had acceptable internal consistency but lacked unidimensionality, five items demonstrated poor fit to the model, 15% of the respondents demonstrated poor fit, and eight items demonstrated DIF related to gender, race, or AIDS diagnosis. Removal of misfitting items resulted in minimal improvement in the CES-D's substantive and structural validity. CES-D scores should be interpreted with caution in adults with HIV/AIDS, particularly when comparing scores across gender and racial groups.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Depression Research and Treatment
Depression Research and Treatment Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Prevalence of Depression and Anxiety and Its Association with Sleep Quality in the First-Year Medical Science Students Common Mental Disorder and Associated Factors among Women Attending Antenatal Care Follow-Up in North Wollo Public Health Facilities, Amhara Region, Northeast Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Study Gratitude and Religiosity in Psychiatric Inpatients with Depression. Developing a Depression Care Model for the Hill Tribes: A Family- and Community-Based Participatory Research. Network Structure of Comorbidity Patterns in U.S. Adults with Depression: A National Study Based on Data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.
×
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