Anna Exner1, Maria Kleinstäuber2,3, Wolfgang Maier4, Angela Fuchs5, Juliana J Petersen6, Ingmar Schäfer7, Jochen Gensichen8, Steffi G Riedel-Heller9, Siegfried Weyerer10, Horst Bickel11, Hans-Helmut König12, Birgitt Wiese13, Gerhard Schön14, Martin Scherer7, Hendrik van den Bussche7, Berend Terluin15. 1. Department of Education Studies and Psychology, University of Siegen, Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2a, 57076, Siegen, Germany. 2. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Philipps-University of Marburg, Gutenbergstraße 18, 35037, Marburg, Germany. maria.kleinstaeuber@staff.uni-marburg.de. 3. Department of Medical Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Auckland, 2 Park Road, Grafton, Auckland, 1023, New Zealand. maria.kleinstaeuber@staff.uni-marburg.de. 4. Clinic of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Str. 25, 53127, Bonn, Germany. 5. Institute of General Practice (ifam), Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany. 6. Institute of General Practice, Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main, Theodor Stern Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt/main, Germany. 7. Department of Primary Medical Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. 8. Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, University Hospital of Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Pettenkoferstr. 10, 80336, Munich, Germany. 9. Institute for Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health, University of Leipzig, Semmelweisstr. 10, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. 10. Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim/Heidelberg University, J5, 68159, Mannheim, Germany. 11. Department of Epidemiological Psychiatry, Technical University of Munich, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. 12. Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. 13. Institute of General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str.1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. 14. Department of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. 15. Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Psychosomatic symptoms and mental health problems are highly prevalent in multimorbid elderly people challenging general practitioners to differentiate between normal stress and psychopathological conditions. The 4DSQ is a Dutch questionnaire developed to detect anxiety, depression, somatization, and distress in primary care. This study aims to analyze measurement equivalence between a German version and the original Dutch instrument. METHODS: A Dutch and a German sample of multimorbid elderly people, matched by gender and age, were analyzed. Equivalence of scale structures was assessed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). To evaluate measurement equivalence across languages, differential item functioning (DIF) was analyzed using Mantel-Haenszel method and hybrid ordinal logistic regression analysis. Differential test functioning (DTF) was assessed using Rasch analysis. RESULTS: A total of 185 German and 185 Dutch participants completed the questionnaire. The CFA confirmed one-factor models for all scales of both 4DSQ versions. Nine items in three scales were flagged with DIF. The anxiety scale showed to be free of DIF. DTF analysis revealed negligible scale impact of DIF. CONCLUSIONS: The German 4DSQ demonstrated measurement equivalence to the original Dutch instrument. Hence, it can be considered a valid questionnaire for the screening for mental health problems in primary care.
PURPOSE: Psychosomatic symptoms and mental health problems are highly prevalent in multimorbid elderly people challenging general practitioners to differentiate between normal stress and psychopathological conditions. The 4DSQ is a Dutch questionnaire developed to detect anxiety, depression, somatization, and distress in primary care. This study aims to analyze measurement equivalence between a German version and the original Dutch instrument. METHODS: A Dutch and a German sample of multimorbid elderly people, matched by gender and age, were analyzed. Equivalence of scale structures was assessed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). To evaluate measurement equivalence across languages, differential item functioning (DIF) was analyzed using Mantel-Haenszel method and hybrid ordinal logistic regression analysis. Differential test functioning (DTF) was assessed using Rasch analysis. RESULTS: A total of 185 German and 185 Dutch participants completed the questionnaire. The CFA confirmed one-factor models for all scales of both 4DSQ versions. Nine items in three scales were flagged with DIF. The anxiety scale showed to be free of DIF. DTF analysis revealed negligible scale impact of DIF. CONCLUSIONS: The German 4DSQ demonstrated measurement equivalence to the original Dutch instrument. Hence, it can be considered a valid questionnaire for the screening for mental health problems in primary care.
Authors: Elena Olariu; Carlos G Forero; Jose Ignacio Castro-Rodriguez; Maria Teresa Rodrigo-Calvo; Pilar Álvarez; Luis M Martín-López; Alicia Sánchez-Toto; Núria D Adroher; Maria J Blasco-Cubedo; Gemma Vilagut; Miquel A Fullana; Jordi Alonso Journal: Depress Anxiety Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 6.505
Authors: P Rattay; H Butschalowsky; A Rommel; F Prütz; S Jordan; E Nowossadeck; O Domanska; P Kamtsiuris Journal: Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 1.513
Authors: Berend Terluin; Desiree B Oosterbaan; Evelien P M Brouwers; Annemieke van Straten; Peter M van de Ven; Wendy Langerak; Harm W J van Marwijk Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2014-04-24 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Berend Terluin; Evelien P M Brouwers; Harm W J van Marwijk; Peter F M Verhaak; Henriëtte E van der Horst Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2009-08-23 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Berend Terluin; Niels Smits; Evelien P M Brouwers; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2016-09-15 Impact factor: 3.186