Suppr超能文献

“筛查”问题在情绪和焦虑障碍诊断访谈中的准确性是否存在亚组差异?

Are there subgroup differences in the accuracy of 'screening' questions for mood and anxiety disorder diagnostic interviews?

机构信息

The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2024 Dec;33(4):e70008. doi: 10.1002/mpr.70008.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of potential measurement bias (i.e., differential item functioning [DIF]) across sex, age, employment, location, and substance use disorders on the screening properties of epidemiological surveys that utilise screening questions when estimating prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders.

METHODS

Data comprised of 15,893 respondents who completed the 2020-2022 Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing. Questions from the screening module of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 were analysed using confirmatory factor analysis and DIF across subgroups of interest. Sensitivity, specificity, and classification rate were derived and compared across models that did and did not adjust for significant levels of DIF.

RESULTS

Sources of DIF were identified across the items was due to age and sex at birth with relatively fewer items displaying DIF across employment, location, and substance use disorders. In terms of screening, the absolute differences in sensitivity and specificity between the DIF-free and DIF models ranged from 0.001 to 0.091.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study found some evidence of DIF in the screening questions used to evaluate mental health disorder prevalence. However, the overall influence of DIF on screening into at least one mood and anxiety disorder module was found to be minimal.

摘要

目的

研究在评估心境和焦虑障碍患病率时,利用筛查问卷的流行病学调查中,性别、年龄、就业状况、地理位置和物质使用障碍等方面的潜在测量偏差(即差异项目功能[DIF])对筛查特性的影响。

方法

本研究的数据来自于 2020-2022 年澳大利亚国家精神卫生和幸福感调查的 15893 名受访者。使用确认性因子分析和感兴趣的子组的 DIF 对来自复合国际诊断访谈 3.0 筛查模块的问题进行了分析。在调整和不调整显著 DIF 水平的模型之间,分别得出了敏感性、特异性和分类率,并进行了比较。

结果

在因出生时的年龄和性别而存在 DIF 的项目中,确定了 DIF 的来源,而在就业、地理位置和物质使用障碍方面,相对较少的项目存在 DIF。就筛查而言,无 DIF 模型和 DIF 模型之间的敏感性和特异性的绝对差异范围为 0.001 至 0.091。

结论

本研究发现,用于评估精神障碍患病率的筛查问题存在一些 DIF 的证据。然而,DIF 对筛查到至少一个心境和焦虑障碍模块的总体影响被认为是最小的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/95f8/11541601/d7f79c8e0275/MPR-33-e70008-g001.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