Laina Rosebrock1,2, Emma Černis1,2, Sinéad Lambe1,2, Felicity Waite1,2, Stephanie Rek3,4, Ariane Petit1,2, Anke Ehlers2,5, David M Clark2,5, Daniel Freeman1,2. 1. Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 2. Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK. 3. Department of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany. 4. International Max Planck Research School for Translational Psychiatry (IMPRS-TP), Munich, Germany. 5. Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive therapies are developed on the principle that specific cognitive appraisals are key determinants in the development and maintenance of mental health disorders. It is likely that particular appraisals of the coronavirus pandemic will have explanatory power for subsequent mental health outcomes in the general public. To enable testing of this hypothesis we developed a questionnaire assessing coronavirus-related cognitions. METHODS: 12 285 participants completed online a 46-item pool of cognitions about coronavirus and six measures of different mental health problems. The sample was randomly split into derivation and validation samples. Exploratory factor analyses determined the factor structure, selection of items, and model fit in the derivation sample. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) then tested this model in the validation sample. Associations of the questionnaire with mental health outcomes were examined. RESULTS: The 26-item, seven-factor, Oxford Psychological Investigation of Coronavirus Questionnaire [TOPIC-Q] was developed. CFA demonstrated a good model fit (χ2 = 2108.43, df = 278, p < 0.001, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.950, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.942, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.033, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.038). The factors were: cognitions about (1) safety and vulnerability, (2) negative long-term impact, (3) having the virus, (4) spreading the virus, (5) social judgment, (6) negative self, and (7) being targeted. The questionnaire explained significant variance in depression (45.8%), social anxiety (37.3%), agoraphobia (23.2%), paranoia (27.3%), post-traumatic stress disorder (57.1%), and panic disorder (31.4%). Cognitions about negative long-term impact had the greatest explanatory power across disorders. CONCLUSIONS: TOPIC-Q provides a method to assess appraisals of the pandemic, which is likely to prove helpful both in longitudinal studies assessing mental health outcomes and in delivery of psychological therapy.
BACKGROUND: Cognitive therapies are developed on the principle that specific cognitive appraisals are key determinants in the development and maintenance of mental health disorders. It is likely that particular appraisals of the coronavirus pandemic will have explanatory power for subsequent mental health outcomes in the general public. To enable testing of this hypothesis we developed a questionnaire assessing coronavirus-related cognitions. METHODS: 12 285 participants completed online a 46-item pool of cognitions about coronavirus and six measures of different mental health problems. The sample was randomly split into derivation and validation samples. Exploratory factor analyses determined the factor structure, selection of items, and model fit in the derivation sample. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) then tested this model in the validation sample. Associations of the questionnaire with mental health outcomes were examined. RESULTS: The 26-item, seven-factor, Oxford Psychological Investigation of Coronavirus Questionnaire [TOPIC-Q] was developed. CFA demonstrated a good model fit (χ2 = 2108.43, df = 278, p < 0.001, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.950, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.942, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.033, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.038). The factors were: cognitions about (1) safety and vulnerability, (2) negative long-term impact, (3) having the virus, (4) spreading the virus, (5) social judgment, (6) negative self, and (7) being targeted. The questionnaire explained significant variance in depression (45.8%), social anxiety (37.3%), agoraphobia (23.2%), paranoia (27.3%), post-traumatic stress disorder (57.1%), and panic disorder (31.4%). Cognitions about negative long-term impact had the greatest explanatory power across disorders. CONCLUSIONS: TOPIC-Q provides a method to assess appraisals of the pandemic, which is likely to prove helpful both in longitudinal studies assessing mental health outcomes and in delivery of psychological therapy.
Authors: M K Shear; T A Brown; D H Barlow; R Money; D E Sholomskas; S W Woods; J M Gorman; L A Papp Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 1997-11 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Christoph Lindner; Ibolya Kotta; Eszter Eniko Marschalko; Kinga Szabo; Kinga Kalcza-Janosi; Jan Retelsdorf Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-22 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Lyn Ellett; Björn Schlier; Jessica L Kingston; Chen Zhu; Suzanne Ho-Wai So; Tania M Lincoln; Eric M J Morris; Brandon A Gaudiano Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2022-09-06 Impact factor: 10.592