Propriedades psicométricas do Questionário Geral de Saúde 28 itens em enfermeiros: proposta com 24 itens

Abstract

Background: The psychometric properties of measurement instruments should be assessed in different populations. Objective: To analyze the psychometric properties of the 28-Item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28) in nurses. Methodology: Methodological validation study of measurement instruments. Analysis of psychometric properties, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) by the principal component analysis method, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, with a nonprobability sample of 1,264 nurses. Results: EFA suggests keeping four factors and deleting four items in 3 dimensions (items 3, 16, 21, and 26). The variance explained by the 4 factors was 61.5%, and Cronbach's alpha was 0.93. The general health scores did not change significantly after deleting the 4 items. The comparison between the 24-item version and the 28-item version revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.996 (p < 0.001) and a cutoff point of 20.5, with a 96.3% sensitivity and a 98.4 specificity. Conclusion:The reassessment of the psychometric properties of GHQ-28 in nurses suggests a reduction to 24 items.

Risks of Ecosystems’ Degradation: Portuguese Healthcare Professionals’ Mental Health, Hope and Resilient Coping

“…Mean GHQ-28 total score was, nevertheless, higher than the one reported by Zonp et al (2022), Salehi et al (2023), Pais Ribeiro et al (2015), Díaz-Ramiro et al (2020), Maciaszek et al (2020), Kolivand et al (2023), andAlmeida et al (2022), but slightly lower than the one found by Seabra et al (2021) and Babicki et al (2021); the standard-deviation was higher than the ones presented in Table 2.…”

“…Regarding Somatic symptoms, the mean score of the present sample was the highest among the studies summarized in Table 2. Inversely, the Anxiety and insomnia mean score was lower than the ones reported by Seabra et al (2021), Maciaszek et al (2020), andBabicki et al (2021), with the samples studied by Díaz-Ramiro et al (2020) and Kolivand et al (2023) having a lower social dysfunction mean score. Finally, only the sample assessed by Kolivand et al (2023) had a mean Severe depression score higher than the present sample.…”

“…Although researchers and clinicians have a wide variety of techniques to assess adults' mental health, the GHQ-28 is frequently used worldwide. In fact, in recent years, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, the GHQ-28 was administered to several samples of health professionals around the globe 1 (Almeida et al, 2022;Babicki et al, 2021;Díaz-Ramiro et al, 2020;Hyseni et al, 2023;Kolivand et al, 2023;Kooteh et al, 2023;Kowalczuk et al, 2023;Maciaszek et al, 2020;Magaña Salazar et al, 2023;Salehi et al, 2023;Seabra et al, 2021;Zonp et al, 2022).…”

Risks of Ecosystems’ Degradation: Portuguese Healthcare Professionals’ Mental Health, Hope and Resilient Coping

“…Although researchers and clinicians have a wide variety of techniques to assess adults' mental health, the GHQ-28 is frequently used worldwide. In fact, in recent years, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, it was administered to several samples of health professionals around the globe (when available, mean and standard deviation values of these samples are presented in the Section 4) ( [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31].…”

Psychometric evaluation of the Dari version of the 28-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28) in Afghanistan

“…Derived from an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of the original GHQ-60, the GHQ-28 was initially crafted in English for the London populace, subsequently undergoing translation into multiple languages worldwide (Hjelle et al, 2019). Comprising four distinct subscales, each encompassing seven items, the GHQ-28 encompasses somatic symptoms (items 1-7), anxiety and insomnia (items 8-14), social dysfunction (items 15-21), and severe depression (items [22][23][24][25][26][27][28]. Respondents rate items on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 to 3.…”