Suppr超能文献

创伤性脑损伤个体的医院焦虑和抑郁量表(HADS)的双因素分析。

Bifactor analysis of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in individuals with traumatic brain injury.

机构信息

Monash-Epworth Rehabilitation Research Centre, Epworth HealthCare, Melbourne, Australia.

School of Psychological Sciences, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2023 May 17;13(1):8017. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-35017-7.

Abstract

Anxiety and depression symptoms are commonly experienced after traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, studies validating measures of anxiety and depression for this population are scarce. Using novel indices derived from symmetrical bifactor modeling, we evaluated whether the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) reliably differentiated anxiety and depression in 874 adults with moderate-severe TBI. The results showed that there was a dominant general distress factor accounting for 84% of the systematic variance in HADS total scores. The specific anxiety and depression factors accounted for little residual variance in the respective subscale scores (12% and 20%, respectively), and overall, minimal bias was found in using the HADS as a unidimensional measure. Further, in a subsample of 184 participants, the HADS subscales did not clearly discriminate between formal anxiety and depressive disorders diagnosed via clinical interview. Results were consistent when accounting for degree of disability, non-English speaking background, and time post-injury. In conclusion, variance in HADS scores after TBI predominately reflects a single underlying latent variable. Clinicians and researchers should exercise caution in interpreting the individual HADS subscales and instead consider using the total score as a more valid, transdiagnostic measure of general distress in individuals with TBI.

摘要

焦虑和抑郁症状在创伤性脑损伤(TBI)后很常见。然而,用于该人群的焦虑和抑郁评估的验证研究却很少。本研究使用来自对称双因素模型的新指标,评估了医院焦虑和抑郁量表(HADS)是否能可靠地区分 874 名中重度 TBI 成人的焦虑和抑郁。结果表明,存在一个占 HADS 总分系统变异 84%的主导一般困扰因素。特定的焦虑和抑郁因素仅解释了各自子量表得分的微小剩余变异(分别为 12%和 20%),总体而言,使用 HADS 作为单一维度测量时,偏差很小。此外,在 184 名参与者的子样本中,HADS 子量表并不能通过临床访谈明确区分正式诊断的焦虑和抑郁障碍。在考虑残疾程度、非英语背景和受伤后时间等因素时,结果是一致的。总之,TBI 后 HADS 评分的变异主要反映了一个单一的潜在变量。临床医生和研究人员在解释个别 HADS 子量表时应谨慎行事,而应考虑将总分作为更有效、跨诊断的 TBI 个体一般困扰的测量指标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4317/10192445/e4a58f74e898/41598_2023_35017_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验