West Nora S, Namuganga Lydia P, Isabirye Dauda, Nakubulwa Rosette, Ddaaki William, Nakyanjo Neema, Nalugoda Fred, Murray Sarah M, Kennedy Caitlin E
University of California San Francisco.
Johns Hopkins University.
Res Sq. 2024 Jul 10:rs.3.rs-4697900. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4697900/v1.
Mental health is conceptualized differently across cultures, making cross-cultural validation of screening tools critical. In Uganda, we used cognitive interviewing to assess and adapt three scales for measuring psychological distress: the Thinking a Lot Questionnaire, the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9), and the Hopkins Symptoms Checklist (HSCL). We recruited 12 people living with HIV from the Rakai Community Cohort Study (RCCS) and interviewed seven potential users of the scales (four RCCS survey interviewers and three local health workers). Data were analyzed systematically using a team-based matrix approach. The HSCL was generally well understood, with minor clarifications needed. The Thinking a Lot Questionnaire was also well understood, though differences between "how much" and "how often" required specificity. Both included local idioms of distress from prior adaptations. The PHQ-9 performed less well, with many questions interpreted variably or showing unclear local applicability, especially among people living with HIV. For example, questions about trouble concentrating were misunderstood, focusing on examples like newspapers rather than the broader issue of concentration. Future research should explore the validity and utility of commonly used instruments as mental health research expands in Africa.
心理健康在不同文化中的概念化方式不同,这使得筛查工具的跨文化验证至关重要。在乌干达,我们采用认知访谈来评估和调整三种用于测量心理困扰的量表:《频繁思考问卷》、《患者健康问卷9项版》(PHQ - 9)和《霍普金斯症状清单》(HSCL)。我们从拉凯社区队列研究(RCCS)中招募了12名艾滋病毒感染者,并采访了该量表的7名潜在使用者(4名RCCS调查访谈员和3名当地卫生工作者)。采用基于团队的矩阵方法对数据进行系统分析。HSCL总体上易于理解,但需要一些小的澄清。《频繁思考问卷》也易于理解,不过“多少”和“多频繁”之间的差异需要明确说明。两者都纳入了先前改编中出现的当地苦恼习语。PHQ - 9的表现较差,许多问题的解释存在差异,或者在当地的适用性不明确,尤其是在艾滋病毒感染者中。例如,关于注意力不集中的问题被误解,关注点集中在诸如报纸等例子上,而不是更广泛的注意力问题。随着非洲心理健康研究的扩展,未来的研究应探索常用工具的有效性和实用性。