Deficits in social functioning are a core symptom of schizophrenia and an important criterion for evaluating the success of treatment. However, there is little agreement regarding its measurement. A common, often cited instrument for assessing self-reported social functioning is the Social Functioning Scale (SFS). The study aimed to investigate the reliability and validity of the German translation. 101 patients suffering from schizophrenia (SZ) and 101 matched controls (C) (60 male / 41 female, 35.8 years in both groups) completed the German version. In addition, demographic, clinical, and functional data were collected. Internal consistency was investigated calculating Cronbach’s alpha for SFS full scale (α: .81) and all subscales (α: .59-.88). Significant bivariate correlation coefficients were found between all subscales as well as between all subscales and full scale (p <.01). For the total sample, principal component analysis gave evidence to prefer a single-factor solution (eigenvalue ≥ 1) accounting for 48.5 % of the variance. For the subsamples, a two-component solution (SZ; 57.0 %) and a three-component solution (C; 65.6 %) fitted best, respectively. For SZ and C, significant associations were found between SFS and external criteria. The main factor “group” emerged as being significant. C showed higher values on both subscales and full scale. The sensitivity of the SFS was examined using discriminant analysis. 86.5% of the participants could be categorized correctly to their actual group. The German translation of the SFS turned out to be a reliable and valid questionnaire comparable to the original English version. This is in line with Spanish and Norwegian translations of the SFS. Concluding, the German version of the SFS is well suited to become a useful and practicable instrument for the assessment of social functioning in both clinical practice and research. It accomplishes commonly used external assessment scales.
The RHS-15 seems to be practicable, economical, and rapidly deployable for the widespread detection of traumatic disorders in refugees living in Europe. The tool proved useful to aid diagnostic assessments and provide treatment to individuals in need, however the time of examination (resp. the duration of staying in the target land) influences the results.
Unaccompanied refugee minors (URM) represent one of the most vulnerable refugee groups due to their young age, developmental status, and insufficient coping strategies. Clinical observations indicate that the frequency of mental health problems varies between different URM subgroups. In the present research project, clinical interviews as a source of qualitative data were combined with quantitative psychometric information in a mixed-method approach in order to study the patterns of mental health problems in 561 URM from four different language groups (Arabic, Farsi, Somali, and Tigrinya) immediately after arrival in the host country (Germany). Qualitative analysis obtained as differentiating categories "language, countries of origin, age, and gender"; quantitatively, the Refugee Health Screener (RHS-15) was applied. According to the positive screening results, the highest number of mental complaints was returned by children and adolescents speaking Farsi (65.9%) and Somali (65.8%). They were followed by URM speaking Arabic (49.4%) and Tigrinya (43.3%). The results were influenced not only by origin, but also by age (with higher burden among older Farsi-speaking URM) and gender (with higher burden among male URM). Although the prevalences in URM subgroups differ, the observed high rates of positive screening results in our sample of URM from Germany substantiate the need for early detection of mental complaints and appropriate mental health care for at least every second URM.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.