Mental Pain Questionnaire: Clinimetric Properties of a Potential Global Person-Centred Outcome Measure

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Fiammetta Cosci, Danilo Carrozzino, Chiara Patierno, Sara Romanazzo, Carmen Berrocal, Alberto Chiarugi, Francesco De Cesaris, Serena Guiducci, Giovanni Mansueto, Kaj Sparle Christensen, Tom Sensky
{"title":"Mental Pain Questionnaire: Clinimetric Properties of a Potential Global Person-Centred Outcome Measure","authors":"Fiammetta Cosci,&nbsp;Danilo Carrozzino,&nbsp;Chiara Patierno,&nbsp;Sara Romanazzo,&nbsp;Carmen Berrocal,&nbsp;Alberto Chiarugi,&nbsp;Francesco De Cesaris,&nbsp;Serena Guiducci,&nbsp;Giovanni Mansueto,&nbsp;Kaj Sparle Christensen,&nbsp;Tom Sensky","doi":"10.1002/cpp.70022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>The Mental Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) was developed using a clinimetric approach to bring together the key features of mental pain into a single, brief, transdiagnostic scale. The present study aims at extending the validation of the MPQ to people from three different clinical settings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A multicentre, cross-sectional study on adults diagnosed with migraine (<i>n</i> = 256), systemic sclerosis (<i>n</i> = 219), or mental disorders (<i>n</i> = 138) was conducted. The MPQ was administered; Rasch and Mokken analyses were performed to assess clinimetric validity.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The overall fit to the Rasch model indicated a misfit, improved by the exclusion of a single item. MPQ showed to be unidimensional. MPQ total score and individual items scalability were optimal except for the same item. The total MPQ score showed an optimal scalability for the systemic sclerosis sample and an acceptable scalability for the migraine and mental disorders samples. Local dependency was found between two pairs of items. Person separation reliability indices (PSI 0.45) showed that the MPQ could not distinguish between groups with different levels of mental pain.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Mental pain has the potential to serve as a truly generic patient-centred outcome measure. Recommendations are made for revisions of the original MPQ, but these will require testing in further validation studies.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10460,"journal":{"name":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","volume":"31 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpp.70022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The Mental Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) was developed using a clinimetric approach to bring together the key features of mental pain into a single, brief, transdiagnostic scale. The present study aims at extending the validation of the MPQ to people from three different clinical settings.

Methods

A multicentre, cross-sectional study on adults diagnosed with migraine (n = 256), systemic sclerosis (n = 219), or mental disorders (n = 138) was conducted. The MPQ was administered; Rasch and Mokken analyses were performed to assess clinimetric validity.

Results

The overall fit to the Rasch model indicated a misfit, improved by the exclusion of a single item. MPQ showed to be unidimensional. MPQ total score and individual items scalability were optimal except for the same item. The total MPQ score showed an optimal scalability for the systemic sclerosis sample and an acceptable scalability for the migraine and mental disorders samples. Local dependency was found between two pairs of items. Person separation reliability indices (PSI 0.45) showed that the MPQ could not distinguish between groups with different levels of mental pain.

Conclusion

Mental pain has the potential to serve as a truly generic patient-centred outcome measure. Recommendations are made for revisions of the original MPQ, but these will require testing in further validation studies.

精神痛苦问卷:以人为本的潜在全球结果测量的临床测量特性
导言 精神痛苦问卷(MPQ)是采用临床测量方法开发的,旨在将精神痛苦的主要特征整合到一个单一、简短、跨诊断的量表中。本研究旨在将 MPQ 的验证范围扩大到来自三种不同临床环境的人群。 方法 对确诊患有偏头痛(256 人)、系统性硬化症(219 人)或精神障碍(138 人)的成年人进行了一项多中心横断面研究。研究采用了 MPQ,并进行了 Rasch 和 Mokken 分析以评估临床有效性。 结果 Rasch 模型的总体拟合结果显示存在不拟合,但排除了一个项目后,拟合结果有所改善。MPQ 显示为单维。除同一项目外,MPQ 总分和单个项目的可扩展性均为最佳。在系统性硬化症样本中,MPQ 总分显示出最佳的可扩展性,而在偏头痛和精神障碍样本中,MPQ 总分显示出可接受的可扩展性。两对项目之间存在局部依赖性。人员分离可靠性指数(PSI 0.45)表明,MPQ 无法区分不同精神痛苦程度的群体。 结论 精神痛苦有可能成为一种真正以患者为中心的通用结果测量方法。建议对原始 MPQ 进行修订,但这些修订需要在进一步的验证研究中进行测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
106
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy aims to keep clinical psychologists and psychotherapists up to date with new developments in their fields. The Journal will provide an integrative impetus both between theory and practice and between different orientations within clinical psychology and psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy will be a forum in which practitioners can present their wealth of expertise and innovations in order to make these available to a wider audience. Equally, the Journal will contain reports from researchers who want to address a larger clinical audience with clinically relevant issues and clinically valid research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信