Skip to main content
Home
Zeitschriften
Zeitungen
Podcast
Gesundheitspolitik
Praxis
Allerlei
Jobs
Fachgebiete
Allgemeinmedizin Anästhesiologie & Intensivmedizin Apotheke Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kinder & Jugendheilkunde Neurologie & Psychiatrie Orthopädie & Unfallchirurgie Pflege Urologie Zahnmedizin
Subfächer Innere Medizin
Diabetologie Gastroenterologie Infektiologie Kardiologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Pneumologie Rheumatologie
Fortbildungen
Überblick Fortbildungen DFP-Literaturstudium-Artikel DFP-Webcast Fortbildungen DFP-Podcasts
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
neuropsychiatrie
Erschienen in:

01.12.2015 | original article

Using Rasch-models to compare the 30-, 20-, and 12-items version of the general health questionnaire taking four recoding schemes into account

verfasst von: Ao.Univ.Prof. Mag.Dr. Rainer W. Alexandrowicz, PhD, Fabian Friedrich, MD, Rebecca Jahn, MD, Nathalie Soulier, MD

Erschienen in: neuropsychiatrie | Ausgabe 4/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Summary

Background

The present study compares the 30-, 20-, and 12-items versions of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) in the original coding and four different recoding schemes (Bimodal, Chronic, Modified Likert and a newly proposed Modified Chronic) with respect to their psychometric qualities.

Methods

The dichotomized versions (i.e. Bimodal, Chronic and Modified Chronic) were evaluated with the Rasch-Model and the polytomous original version and the Modified Likert version were evaluated with the Partial Credit Model.

Results

In general, the versions under consideration showed agreement with the model assumption. However, the recoded versions exhibited some deficits with respect to the Outfit index.

Conclusions

Because of the item deficits and for theoretical reasons we argue in favor of using the any of the three length versions with the original four-categorical coding scheme. Nevertheless, any of the versions appears apt for clinical use from a psychometric perspective.
Vorheriger Artikel Richard Freiherr v. Krafft-Ebing und Sigmund Freud – Diskurs über die „Normalität“ und „Perversion“ von Sexualität im ausgehenden 19. Jahrhundert und beginnenden 20. Jahrhundert
Nächster Artikel Self-reported and performance based perfectionism in mothers of individuals with Anorexia Nervosa: a pilot study
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Goldberg DP. The detection of psychiatric illness by questionnaire. NY: Oxford University Press; 1972.
2.
Goldberg DP, Cooper B, Eastwood MR, Kedward HB, Shepher M. A standardized psychiatric interview for use in community surveys. Br J Prevent Soc Med. 1970;24:18–23.
3.
Jacob K, Brugha D, Mann A. The validation of the 12-item General Health Questionnaire among ethnic Indian women living in the United Kingdom. Psychol Med. 1997;27:1215–7.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Schmitz N, Kruse J, Heckrath C, Alberti L, Tress W. Diagnosing mental disorders in primary care: the Genreal Health Questionnaire (GHQ) and the Symptom Checklist (SCL-90-R) as screening instruments. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 1999;34:360–6.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Malt UF. The validity of the General Health Questionnaire in a sample of accidentally injured adults. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1989;80:103–12.CrossRef
6.
Goldberg PD, Williams P. A user’s guide to the General Health Questionnaire. Windsor: NFER-Nelson; 1988.
7.
Andrich D, van Schoubroeck L. The General Health Questionnaire: a psychometric analysis using latent trait theory. Psychol Med. 1989;19:469–85.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Smith AB, Fallowfield LJ, Stark DP, Velikova G, Jenkins V. A, Rasch and confirmatory factor analysis of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ)—12. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8:45.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
9.
Delgado-Gomez D, Lopez-Castroman J, de Leon-Martinez V, Baca-Garcia E, Cabanas-Arrate ML, Aguado D. Psychometrical assessment and item analysis of the general health questionnaire in victims of terrorism. Psychol Assess. 2013;25:279–87.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Samejima F. Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monogr Suppl 34. 1969.
11.
Goodchild ME, Duncan-Jones P. Chronicity and the General Health Questionnaire. Br J Psychiatry. 1985;146:55–61.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Jansen PGW, Roskam EE. Latent trait models and dichotomization of graded responses. Psychometrika. 1986;51:69–91.CrossRef
13.
Roskam EE, Jansen PGW. Conditions for Rasch-dichotomizability of the unidimensional polytomous Rasch model. Psychometrika. 1989;54:317–32.CrossRef
14.
Andrich D. Models for measurement, precision, and the nondichotomization of graded responses. Psychometrika. 1995a;60:7–26.CrossRef
15.
Andrich D. Further remarks on nondichotomization of graded responses. Psychometrika. 1995b;60:37–46.CrossRef
16.
Friedrich F, Alexandrowicz R, Benda N, Cerny G, Wancata J. The criterion validity of different versions of the General Health Questionnaire among non-psychiaric inpatients. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2011;46:635–41.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Stevens SS. On the theory of scales of measurement. Science. 1946;103:677–80.CrossRef
18.
Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danmarks Pædagogiske Institut; 1960.
19.
Rasch G. An individualistic approach to item analysis. In: Lazarsfeld PF, Henry NW, editors. Readings in mathematical social science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1966. pp 89–107.
20.
Masters GN. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika. 1982;47:149–74.CrossRef
21.
Baker FB, Kim S-H. Item response theory: parameter estimation techniques. 2nd revision, revised and expanded. NY: Marcel Dekker; 2004.
22.
Mislevy RJ. Randomization-based inference about latent variables from complex samples. Psychometrika. 1991;56:177–96.CrossRef
23.
Warm TA. Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika. 1989;54:427–50.CrossRef
24.
Wu ML, Wilson MR. ConQuest: multi-aspect test software [Software Handbook]. Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research; 1997.
25.
Christensen KB, Kreiner S, Mesbah M, editors. Rasch models in health. Hoboken: Wiley; 2013.
26.
Engelhard G. Invariant measurement. Using Rasch models in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. NY: Routledge; 2013.
27.
Fischer GH, Molenaar IW, Models R. Foundations, recent developments, and applications. NY: Springer; 1995.
28.
Rocha NS, Chachamocvich E, Almeida Fleck MP, Tennant A. An introduction to Rasch analysis for psychiatric practice and research. J Psychiatric Res. 2013;47:141–8.CrossRef
29.
Glas CAW, Verhelst ND. Testing the Rasch model. In: Fischer GH, Molenaar IW, editors. Rasch models. Foundations, recent developments, and applications. NY: Springer; 1995. pp. 69–95.
30.
Andersen EB. A goodness of fit test for the Rasch model. Psychometrika. 1973;38:123–40.CrossRef
31.
Glas CAW. Differential item functioning depending on general covariates. In: Boomsma A, van Duijn MAJ, Snijders TAB, editors. Essays on item response theory. NY: Springer; 2001. pp. 131–48.CrossRef
32.
Draxler C. Sample size determination for Rasch model tests. Psychometrika. 2010;75:708–24.CrossRef
33.
Draxler C, Alexandrowicz RW. (in press). Sample size determination within the scope of conditional maximum likelihood estimation with special focus on testing the Rasch model. Psychometrika.
34.
Christensen KB, Bjørner JB, Kreiner S, Petersen JH. Testing unidimensionality in polytomous Rasch models. Psychometrika. 2002;67:563–74.CrossRef
35.
Smith AB, Rush R, Fallowfield LJ, Velikova G, Sharpe M. Rasch fit statistics and sample size considerations for polytomous data. BMC Med Res Method. 2008. doi:10.​1186/​1471-2288-8-33.
36.
37.
Alexandrowicz RW. R in 10 Schritten. Einführung in die statistische Programmierumgebung. Wien: Facultas/UTB; 2013.
38.
39.
Wiedermann WT, Alexandrowicz RW. A plea for the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-Test: further considerations on Rasch & Guiard́s ‘The robustness of parametric statistical methods’. Psychology. Science. 2007;49:2–12.
40.
Alexandrowicz RW, Fritzsche S, Keller F. Die Anwendbarkeit des BDI-II in klinischen und nichtklinischen Populationen aus psychometrischer Sicht. Eine vergleichende Analyse mit dem Rasch-Modell. Neuropsychiatrie. 2014;28:63–73.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Using Rasch-models to compare the 30-, 20-, and 12-items version of the general health questionnaire taking four recoding schemes into account
verfasst von
Ao.Univ.Prof. Mag.Dr. Rainer W. Alexandrowicz, PhD
Fabian Friedrich, MD
Rebecca Jahn, MD
Nathalie Soulier, MD
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2015
Verlag
Springer Vienna
Erschienen in
neuropsychiatrie / Ausgabe 4/2015
Print ISSN: 0948-6259
Elektronische ISSN: 2194-1327
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40211-015-0160-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2015

Biologische Grundlagen des Problematischen Internetnutzungsverhaltens (PIN) und therapeutische Implikationen

  • übersicht

Franz Stefan Kohl – „Linie. Farbe. Bewegung“

  • kultur im kontext

Zur Qualitätssicherung der Gewichtsrestitution bei Magersucht – Pathophysiologie, evidenzbasierte Praxis und Vermeidung des Refeeding-Syndroms

  • originalarbeit

Bericht aus dem Vorstand

  • bericht aus dem ögpp-vorstand

Bericht des Präsidiums

  • bericht aus dem ögkjp-vorstand

Richard Freiherr v. Krafft-Ebing und Sigmund Freud – Diskurs über die „Normalität“ und „Perversion“ von Sexualität im ausgehenden 19. Jahrhundert und beginnenden 20. Jahrhundert

  • originalarbeit