Previous studies have failed to take baseline severity into account when assessing the effects of pathological personality traits (PPT) on treatment outcome. This study assessed the prognostic... Show morePrevious studies have failed to take baseline severity into account when assessing the effects of pathological personality traits (PPT) on treatment outcome. This study assessed the prognostic value of PPT (Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Short Form) on treatment outcome (Brief Symptom Inventory [BSI-posttreatment]) among patients with depressive and/or anxiety disorders ( N = 5689). Baseline symptom level (BSI-pretreatment) was taken into account as a mediator or moderator variable. Results showed significant effects of PPT on outcome, of which Emotional Dysregulation demonstrated the largest association ( β = 0.43, p < 0.001). When including baseline BSI score as a mediator variable, a direct effect ( β = 0.11, p < 0.001) remained approximately one-third of the total effect. The effects of Emotional Dysregulation (interaction effect β = 0.061, p < 0.001) and Inhibition (interaction effect β = 0.062, p < 0.001), but not Compulsivity or Dissocial Behavior, were moderated by the baseline symptom level. PPT predicts higher symptom levels, both before and after treatment, but yields relatively small direct effects on symptom decline when the effect of pretreatment severity is taken into account. Show less
Previous studies have failed to take baseline severity into account when assessing the effects of pathological personality traits (PPT) on treatment outcome. This study assessed the prognostic... Show morePrevious studies have failed to take baseline severity into account when assessing the effects of pathological personality traits (PPT) on treatment outcome. This study assessed the prognostic value of PPT (Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Short Form) on treatment outcome (Brief Symptom Inventory [BSI-posttreatment]) among patients with depressive and/or anxiety disorders (N = 5689). Baseline symptom level (BSI-pretreatment) was taken into account as a mediator or moderator variable. Results showed significant effects of PPT on outcome, of which Emotional Dysregulation demonstrated the largest association (beta = 0.43, p < 0.001). When including baseline BSI score as a mediator variable, a direct effect (beta = 0.11, p < 0.001) remained approximately one-third of the total effect. The effects of Emotional Dysregulation (interaction effect beta = 0.061, p < 0.001) and Inhibition (interaction effect beta = 0.062, p < 0.001), but not Compulsivity or Dissocial Behavior, were moderated by the baseline symptom level. PPT predicts higher symptom levels, both before and after treatment, but yields relatively small direct effects on symptom decline when the effect of pretreatment severity is taken into account. Show less
Flens, G.; Terwee, C.B.; Smits, N.; Williams, G.; Spinhoven, P.; Roorda, L.D.; Beurs, E. de 2022
We evaluated construct validity, responsiveness, and utility of change indicators of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS adult v1.0 item banks for Depression and Anxiety administered as computerized adaptive... Show moreWe evaluated construct validity, responsiveness, and utility of change indicators of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS adult v1.0 item banks for Depression and Anxiety administered as computerized adaptive test (CAT). Specifically, the CATs were compared to the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) using pre- and re-test data of adult patients treated for common mental disorders (N = 400; median pre-to-re-test interval = 215 days). Construct validity was evaluated with Pearson's correlations and Cohen's ds; responsiveness with Pearson's correlations and pre-post effect sizes (ES); utility of change indicators with kappa coefficients and percentages of (dis)agreement. The results showed that the PROMIS CATs measure similar constructs as matching BSI scales. Under the assumption of measuring similar constructs, the CAT and BSI Depression scales were similarly responsive. For the Anxiety scales, we found a higher responsiveness for CAT (ES = 0.64) compared to the BSI (ES = 0.50). Finally, both CATs categorized the change scores of more patients as changed compared to matching BSI scales, indicating that the PROMIS CATs may be more able to detect actual change than the BSI. Based on these findings, the PROMIS CATs may be considered a modest improvement over matching BSI scales as tools for reviewing treatment progress with patients. We discuss several additional differences between the PROMIS CATs and the BSI to help test users choose instruments. These differences include the adopted measurement theory (Item Response Theory vs. Classical Test Theory), the mode of administration (CAT vs. fixed items), and the area of application (universal vs. predominantly clinical). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved). Show less
Previous studies of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) interview version suggested a second-order model, with a general disability factor and six factors... Show morePrevious studies of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) interview version suggested a second-order model, with a general disability factor and six factors on a lower level. The goal of this study is to investigate if we can find support for a similar higher-order factor structure of the 36-item self-report version of the WHODAS 2.0 in a Dutch psychiatric outpatient sample. We aim to give special attention to the differences between the non-working group sample and the working group sample. Additionally, we intend to provide preliminary norms for clinical interpretation of the WHODAS 2.0 scores in psychiatric settings.\nPatients seeking specialized ambulatory treatment, primarily for depressive or anxiety symptoms, completed the WHODAS 2.0 as part of the initial interview. The total sample consisted of 770 patients with a mean age of 37.5 years (SD = 13.3) of whom 280 were males and 490 were females. Several factorial compositions (i.e., one unidimensional model and two second-order models) were modeled using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Descriptive statistics, model-fit statistics, reliability of the (sub)scales, and preliminary norms for interpreting test scores are reported. For the non-working group, the second-order model with a general disability factor and six factors on a lower level, provided an adequate fit. Whereas, for the working group, the second-order model with a general disability factor and seven factors on a lower level seemed more appropriate. The WHODAS 2.0 36-item self-report form showed adequate levels of reliability. Percentile ranks and normalized T-scores are provided to aid clinical evaluations. Our results lend support for a factorial structure of the WHODAS 2.0 36-item self-report version that is comparable to the interview version. While we conjecture that a seven-factor solution might give a better reflection of item content and item variance, further research is needed to assess the clinical relevance of such a model. At this point, we recommend using the second-order structure with six factors that matches past findings of the interview form. Show less
Flens, G.; Terwee, C.B.; Smits, N.; Williams, G.; Spinhoven, P.; Roorda, L.D.; Beurs, E. de 2021
Public Significance Statement This study suggests that PROMIS CATs for Depression and Anxiety measure the same constructs as matching BSI subscales in Dutch adult patients treated for common mental... Show morePublic Significance Statement This study suggests that PROMIS CATs for Depression and Anxiety measure the same constructs as matching BSI subscales in Dutch adult patients treated for common mental disorders, are at least as able to detect change over time, and categorize the change scores of more patients as actually changed. Based on these findings, the PROMIS CATs may be considered a modest improvement as tools for reviewing treatment progress with patients.We evaluated construct validity, responsiveness, and utility of change indicators of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS adult v1.0 item banks for Depression and Anxiety administered as computerized adaptive test (CAT). Specifically, the CATs were compared to the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) using pre- and re-test data of adult patients treated for common mental disorders (N = 400; median pre-to-re-test interval = 215 days). Construct validity was evaluated with Pearson's correlations and Cohen's ds; responsiveness with Pearson's correlations and pre-post effect sizes (ES); utility of change indicators with kappa coefficients and percentages of (dis)agreement. The results showed that the PROMIS CATs measure similar constructs as matching BSI scales. Under the assumption of measuring similar constructs, the CAT and BSI Depression scales were similarly responsive. For the Anxiety scales, we found a higher responsiveness for CAT (ES = 0.64) compared to the BSI (ES = 0.50). Finally, both CATs categorized the change scores of more patients as changed compared to matching BSI scales, indicating that the PROMIS CATs may be more able to detect actual change than the BSI. Based on these findings, the PROMIS CATs may be considered a modest improvement over matching BSI scales as tools for reviewing treatment progress with patients. We discuss several additional differences between the PROMIS CATs and the BSI to help test users choose instruments. These differences include the adopted measurement theory (Item Response Theory vs. Classical Test Theory), the mode of administration (CAT vs. fixed items), and the area of application (universal vs. predominantly clinical). Show less
Purpose Previous studies of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) interview version suggested a second-order model, with a general disability factor and six... Show morePurpose Previous studies of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) interview version suggested a second-order model, with a general disability factor and six factors on a lower level. The goal of this study is to investigate if we can find support for a similar higher-order factor structure of the 36-item self-report version of the WHODAS 2.0 in a Dutch psychiatric outpatient sample. We aim to give special attention to the differences between the non-working group sample and the working group sample. Additionally, we intend to provide preliminary norms for clinical interpretation of the WHODAS 2.0 scores in psychiatric settings. Methods Patients seeking specialized ambulatory treatment, primarily for depressive or anxiety symptoms, completed the WHODAS 2.0 as part of the initial interview. The total sample consisted of 770 patients with a mean age of 37.5 years (SD = 13.3) of whom 280 were males and 490 were females. Several factorial compositions (i.e., one unidimensional model and two second-order models) were modeled using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Descriptive statistics, model-fit statistics, reliability of the (sub)scales, and preliminary norms for interpreting test scores are reported. Results For the non-working group, the second-order model with a general disability factor and six factors on a lower level, provided an adequate fit. Whereas, for the working group, the second-order model with a general disability factor and seven factors on a lower level seemed more appropriate. The WHODAS 2.0 36-item self-report form showed adequate levels of reliability. Percentile ranks and normalized T-scores are provided to aid clinical evaluations. Conclusion Our results lend support for a factorial structure of the WHODAS 2.0 36-item self-report version that is comparable to the interview version. While we conjecture that a seven-factor solution might give a better reflection of item content and item variance, further research is needed to assess the clinical relevance of such a model. At this point, we recommend using the second-order structure with six factors that matches past findings of the interview form. Show less
Flens, G.; Smits, N.; Terwee, C.B.l.; Pijck, L.; Spinhoven, P.; Beurs, E. de 2021
We investigated longitudinal measurement invariance in the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS adult v1.0 item banks for Depression and Anxiety using two clinical samples with mood and anxiety disorders (n = 640... Show moreWe investigated longitudinal measurement invariance in the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS adult v1.0 item banks for Depression and Anxiety using two clinical samples with mood and anxiety disorders (n = 640 and n = 528, respectively). Factor analysis was used to evaluate whether the item banks were sufficiently unidimensional at two test-occasions and whether the measured constructs remained the same over time. The results indicated that the item banks were sufficiently unidimensional, but the thresholds and residual variances of the constructs changed over time. However, using tentative rules of thumb, these invariance violations did not substantially affect the endorsement of a specific response category of a specific item at a specific test-occasion. Furthermore, the impact on the mean latent change scores of the item banks remained below the proposed cutoff value for substantial bias. These findings suggest that the invariance violations lacked practical significance for test-users, meaning that the item banks provide sufficiently invariant latent factor scores for use in clinical practice. Show less
Flens, G.; Smits, N.; Terwee, C.B.; Pijck, L.; Spinhoven, P.; Beurs, E. de 2019
We investigated longitudinal measurement invariance in the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS adult v1.0 item banks for Depression and Anxiety using two clinical samples with mood and anxiety disorders (n = 640... Show moreWe investigated longitudinal measurement invariance in the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS adult v1.0 item banks for Depression and Anxiety using two clinical samples with mood and anxiety disorders (n = 640 and n = 528, respectively). Factor analysis was used to evaluate whether the item banks were sufficiently unidimensional at two test-occasions and whether the measured constructs remained the same over time. The results indicated that the item banks were sufficiently unidimensional, but the thresholds and residual variances of the constructs changed over time. However, using tentative rules of thumb, these invariance violations did not substantially affect the endorsement of a specific response category of a specific item at a specific test-occasion. Furthermore, the impact on the mean latent change scores of the item banks remained below the proposed cutoff value for substantial bias. These findings suggest that the invariance violations lacked practical significance for test-users, meaning that the item banks provide sufficiently invariant latent factor scores for use in clinical practice. Show less
Flens, G.; Smits, N.; Terwee, C.B.; Dekker, J.; Huijbrechts, I.; Spinhoven, P.; Beurs, E. de 2019
We used the Dutch-Flemish version of the USA PROMIS adult V1.0 item bank for Anxiety as input for developing a computerized adaptive test (CAT) to measure the entire latent anxiety continuum. First... Show moreWe used the Dutch-Flemish version of the USA PROMIS adult V1.0 item bank for Anxiety as input for developing a computerized adaptive test (CAT) to measure the entire latent anxiety continuum. First, psychometric analysis of a combined clinical and general population sample (N = 2,010) showed that the 29-item bank has psychometric properties that are required for a CAT administration. Second, a post hoc CAT simulation showed efficient and highly precise measurement, with an average number of 8.64 items for the clinical sample, and 9.48 items for the general population sample. Furthermore, the accuracy of our CAT version was highly similar to that of the full item bank administration, both in final score estimates and in distinguishing clinical subjects from persons without a mental health disorder. We discuss the future directions and limitations of CAT development with the Dutch-Flemish version of the PROMIS Anxiety item bank. Show less
Flens, G.; Smits, N.; Terwee, C.B.; Dekker, J.; Huijbrechts, I.; Spinhoven, P.; Beurs, E. de 2019
