Construct validity and reliability of the generalised anxiety disorder-7 scale in a sample of tuberculosis patients in the Free State Province, South Africa.

IF 1.4 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Southern African Journal of Infectious Diseases Pub Date : 2021-08-19 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.4102/sajid.v36i1.298
Gladys Kigozi
{"title":"Construct validity and reliability of the generalised anxiety disorder-7 scale in a sample of tuberculosis patients in the Free State Province, South Africa.","authors":"Gladys Kigozi","doi":"10.4102/sajid.v36i1.298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) frequently occurs amongst patients with tuberculosis (TB) and contributes to poor quality of life and treatment outcomes. This study evaluated the construct validity and reliability of the GAD-7 scale in a sample of patients with TB in the Free State Province.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A pilot study was conducted amongst a convenience sample of 208 adult patients newly diagnosed with drug-susceptible TB attending primary healthcare (PHC) facilities in the Lejweleputswa District in the Free State. A structured interviewer-administered questionnaire comprising social demographic questions and the GAD-7 scale was used. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to investigate the construct validity of the GAD-7 scale. The reliability of the scale was assessed by calculating Cronbach's alpha.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis showed that a modified two-factor (somatic symptoms and cognitive -emotional symptoms) model, in which the items 'Not being able to stop or control worrying' and 'Worrying too much about different things' were allowed to covary (Comparative Fit Index: 0.996, Tucker-Lewis Index: 0.993, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation: 0.070, 90% confidence interval: 0.032-0.089), fitted the data better than a unidimensional (generalised anxiety) or an unmodified two-factor model. The indicators all showed significant positive factor loadings, with standardised coefficients ranging from 0.719 to 0.873. The Cronbach's alpha of the scale was 0.86.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The modified two-factor structure and high internal consistency respectively provide evidence for construct validity and reliability of the GAD-7 scale for assessing GAD amongst patients with TB. Studies are necessary to assess the performance of this brief scale under routine TB programme conditions in the Free State.</p>","PeriodicalId":44007,"journal":{"name":"Southern African Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":"36 1","pages":"298"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8424773/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern African Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajid.v36i1.298","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) frequently occurs amongst patients with tuberculosis (TB) and contributes to poor quality of life and treatment outcomes. This study evaluated the construct validity and reliability of the GAD-7 scale in a sample of patients with TB in the Free State Province.

Methods: A pilot study was conducted amongst a convenience sample of 208 adult patients newly diagnosed with drug-susceptible TB attending primary healthcare (PHC) facilities in the Lejweleputswa District in the Free State. A structured interviewer-administered questionnaire comprising social demographic questions and the GAD-7 scale was used. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to investigate the construct validity of the GAD-7 scale. The reliability of the scale was assessed by calculating Cronbach's alpha.

Results: The analysis showed that a modified two-factor (somatic symptoms and cognitive -emotional symptoms) model, in which the items 'Not being able to stop or control worrying' and 'Worrying too much about different things' were allowed to covary (Comparative Fit Index: 0.996, Tucker-Lewis Index: 0.993, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation: 0.070, 90% confidence interval: 0.032-0.089), fitted the data better than a unidimensional (generalised anxiety) or an unmodified two-factor model. The indicators all showed significant positive factor loadings, with standardised coefficients ranging from 0.719 to 0.873. The Cronbach's alpha of the scale was 0.86.

Conclusion: The modified two-factor structure and high internal consistency respectively provide evidence for construct validity and reliability of the GAD-7 scale for assessing GAD amongst patients with TB. Studies are necessary to assess the performance of this brief scale under routine TB programme conditions in the Free State.

在南非自由邦省结核病患者样本中构建广泛性焦虑障碍-7量表的效度和信度。
背景:广泛性焦虑症(GAD)经常发生在肺结核患者中,并导致生活质量和治疗结果不佳。本研究评估了GAD-7量表在自由邦省结核病患者样本中的结构有效性和可靠性。方法:在自由邦Lejweleputswa区初级卫生保健(PHC)设施的208名新诊断为药物敏感结核病的成年患者的便利样本中进行了一项试点研究。采用结构化访谈者管理的问卷,包括社会人口学问题和GAD-7量表。采用验证性因素分析法对GAD-7量表的结构有效性进行调查。通过计算Cronbachα来评估量表的可靠性。结果:分析表明,一个修正的双因素(躯体症状和认知-情绪症状)模型,其中“无法停止或控制担忧”和“对不同事情过于担忧”两个项目被允许共存(比较拟合指数:0.996,Tucker Lewis指数:0.993,近似均方根误差:0.070,90%置信区间:0.032-0.089),与一维(广义焦虑)或未修改的双因素模型相比,数据拟合得更好。这些指标都显示出显著的正因子负荷,标准化系数在0.719至0.873之间。该量表的Cronbachα为0.86。结论:改进的双因素结构和高度的内部一致性分别为GAD-7量表评估结核病患者GAD的结构有效性和可靠性提供了证据。有必要进行研究,以评估在自由邦常规结核病方案条件下这一简短量表的表现。
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
自引率
11.10%
发文量
50
审稿时长
52 weeks
×
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