Skip navigation
Skip navigation

Validity of the PROMIS depression and anxiety common metrics in an online sample of Australian adults

Sunderland, Matthew; Batterham, Philip; Calear, Alison; Carragher, N.

Description

Purpose Recent US-based studies have utilised item response theory (IRT) to equate several self-report scales for depression and anxiety using the PROMIS depression and anxiety common metrics. The current study reports on the validity of the US-based equating procedures for the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) and Kessler 6 psychological distress scale (K6) to equate scores in a large online sample of Australian adults. Methods Data comprised...[Show more]

dc.contributor.authorSunderland, Matthew
dc.contributor.authorBatterham, Philip
dc.contributor.authorCalear, Alison
dc.contributor.authorCarragher, N.
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-25T06:31:08Z
dc.identifier.issn0962-9343
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/171656
dc.description.abstractPurpose Recent US-based studies have utilised item response theory (IRT) to equate several self-report scales for depression and anxiety using the PROMIS depression and anxiety common metrics. The current study reports on the validity of the US-based equating procedures for the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) and Kessler 6 psychological distress scale (K6) to equate scores in a large online sample of Australian adults. Methods Data comprised 3175 Australians recruited online. Each participant provided responses to the PROMIS depression and anxiety item banks, the PHQ-9, the GAD-7 and the K6. Two scoring methods were used to convert the scores on the PHQ-9, GAD-7 and K6 to the PROMIS depression and anxiety metrics. The converted scores were compared to the PROMIS depression and anxiety scores using intraclass correlations, mean difference, mean of absolute differences and Bland–Altman limits of agreement. Results Statistically significant mean differences were identified in five out of eight equated scores, albeit the effect sizes were small (Cohen’s dz ≤ 0.25). The correlations were uniformly high (ICC ≥ 0.86). The mean of absolute differences between observed and equated scores for each metric and across scoring methods ranged between 4.23 and 5.33. Conclusions The results demonstrate the validity of generating PROMIS depression and anxiety scores from the PHQ-9, GAD-7 and K6 in an independent sample of Australians. The agreement between equated scores provides some assurance that researchers and clinicians can utilise the converted PHQ-9, GAD-7 and K6 scores on the PROMIS metrics without a substantial decrease in accuracy and precision at the group level.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherKluwer Academic Publishers
dc.rights© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018
dc.sourceQuality of Life Research
dc.titleValidity of the PROMIS depression and anxiety common metrics in an online sample of Australian adults
dc.typeJournal article
local.description.notesImported from ARIES
local.identifier.citationvolume27
dc.date.issued2018
local.identifier.absfor170110 - Psychological Methodology, Design and Analysis
local.identifier.absfor111711 - Health Information Systems (incl. Surveillance)
local.identifier.absfor111714 - Mental Health
local.identifier.ariespublicationa383154xPUB10133
local.publisher.urlhttps://link.springer.com
local.type.statusPublished Version
local.contributor.affiliationSunderland, Matthew, University of New South Wales
local.contributor.affiliationBatterham, Philip, College of Health and Medicine, ANU
local.contributor.affiliationCalear (previously Neil), Alison, College of Health and Medicine, ANU
local.contributor.affiliationCarragher, N., University of New South Wales
local.description.embargo2037-12-31
dc.relationhttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1043952
dc.relationhttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1083311
dc.relationhttp://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/1122544
local.bibliographicCitation.issue9
local.identifier.doi10.1007/s11136-018-1905-5
local.identifier.absseo920204 - Evaluation of Health Outcomes
local.identifier.absseo920410 - Mental Health
local.identifier.absseo920209 - Mental Health Services
dc.date.updated2022-04-24T08:16:09Z
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-85048049175
local.identifier.thomsonIDWOS:000442862200023
CollectionsANU Research Publications

Download

File Description SizeFormat Image
01_Sunderland_Validity_of_the_PROMIS_2018.pdf744.76 kBAdobe PDF    Request a copy


Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Updated:  19 May 2020/ Responsible Officer:  University Librarian/ Page Contact:  Library Systems & Web Coordinator