Deconstructing therapy outcome measurement with rasch analysis of a measure of general clinical distress: The Symptom Checklist-90-Revised.

Abstract

This version is available at https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/3265/ Strathprints is designed to allow users to access the research output of the University of Strathclyde. Unless otherwise explicitly stated on the manuscript, Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Please check the manuscript for details of any other licences that may have been applied. You may not engage in further distribution of the material for any profitmaking activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute both the url (https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/) and the content of this paper for research or private study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge.Any correspondence concerning this service should be sent to the Strathprints administrator: strathprints@strath.ac.ukThe Strathprints institutional repository (https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk) is a digital archive of University of Strathclyde research outputs. It has been developed to disseminate open access research outputs, expose data about those outputs, and enable the management and persistent access to Strathclyde's intellectual output. Author note. We thank the members of the two research teams who helped collect the data analyzed in this article, as well as Melissa Klein and Emily Breighner for assistance with item severity ratings and Sadie Chatmon for data entry. Address correspondence to Robert Elliott, Counselling Unit, University of Strathclyde, 76 Southbrae Drive, Glasgow G13 1PP, UK. Email: fac0029@gmail.com . AbstractRasch analysis was used to illustrate the usefulness of item-level analyses for evaluating a common therapy outcome measure of general clinical distress, the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R, Derogatis, 1994). Using complementary therapy research samples, we found that the instrumentÕs 5-point rating scale exceeded clientsÕ ability to make reliable discriminations and could be improved by collapsing it into a 3-point version (combining scales points 1 with 2 and 3 with 4). This, plus removing three misfitting items, increased person separation from 4.90 to 5.07 and item separation from 7.76 to 8.52 (resulting in alphas of .96 and .99 respectively). Some SCL-90-R subscales had low internal-consistency reliabilities; SCL-90-R items can be used to define one factor of general clinical distress that is generally stable across both samples, with two small residual factors.

What process attributes of clinical genetics services could maximise patient benefits?

“…A number of researchers have, however, converged on the importance of the client -counsellor relationship for a successful outcome. 29,30 This study adds to previous findings in identifying some further specific dimensions of a good quality relationship such as social competence, flexibility and compassion (empathy and responsiveness) on the part of clinicians.…”

Activity-related pain in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders

“…The questionnaire contains 25 questions comprising the dimensions of depression, anxiety and somatisation, and strong relationship between the dimensions have been confirmed by Rasch analyses [42]. The items are scored on a 4 points Likert scale rating from 'not at all' to 'very much', summed and then divided by 25.…”

A Rasch Re-Analysis of the Partnership Questionnaire

“…AUC values between .7 and .8 denote acceptable fit, values between .8 and .9 denote good fit, and values above .9 denote very good model fit (Hosmer & Lemeshow, 2000). The final model with either the original or a dichotomous response format was selected based on several fit criteria (Lopez, 1996; for an example, Elliott et al, 2006).…”

“…Elliott et al, 2006 for the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R)). To be able to use the PFB as a checklist, the original instructions for the subscales Communication and Tenderness (Hahlweg, 1996), "In the following you can see a list of behaviors, which possibly occur in your relationship/marriage.…”