Cargando…

Cross‐cultural factorial validation of the Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R); findings from a nationally representative survey (EMPIRIC)

The Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R) has been widely adopted across cultures to assess common mental disorders. We assessed the factorial validity of the CIS‐R across ethnic minority groups, using data from a nationally representative survey conducted in England in 2000. The sample comp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Das‐Munshi, Jayati, Castro‐Costa, Erico, Dewey, Michael E., Nazroo, James, Prince, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4230331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24478128
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1428
_version_ 1782344251427782656
author Das‐Munshi, Jayati
Castro‐Costa, Erico
Dewey, Michael E.
Nazroo, James
Prince, Martin
author_facet Das‐Munshi, Jayati
Castro‐Costa, Erico
Dewey, Michael E.
Nazroo, James
Prince, Martin
author_sort Das‐Munshi, Jayati
collection PubMed
description The Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R) has been widely adopted across cultures to assess common mental disorders. We assessed the factorial validity of the CIS‐R across ethnic minority groups, using data from a nationally representative survey conducted in England in 2000. The sample comprised White British (n = 837), Irish (n = 733), Black Caribbean (n = 694), Bangladeshi (n = 650), Indian (n = 643) and Pakistani (n = 724) respondents. Ordered logistic regression determined the reporting of CIS‐R symptoms. Principal components analysis (PCA) determined the underlying construct of the CIS‐R in White British participants. These factor solutions were then assessed for “best fit” using confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) across all ethnic groups. In ordered logistic regression analyses, there was heterogeneity in the reporting of worries, phobias, panic and somatic symptoms across ethnic minority groups relative to the White British group. “Best” fit solutions confirmed through CFA were models where all symptoms were allowed to vary across ethnic groups, or models where an underlying “depression‐anxiety” construct was held invariant while “somatic symptoms” were permitted to vary across groups, although differences between models assessed were slight. In conclusion, there may be benefits in assessing the functioning of certain CIS‐R items within specific cultural contexts to ensure adequate face validity of the CIS‐R. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4230331
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42303312014-12-11 Cross‐cultural factorial validation of the Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R); findings from a nationally representative survey (EMPIRIC) Das‐Munshi, Jayati Castro‐Costa, Erico Dewey, Michael E. Nazroo, James Prince, Martin Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Research Articles The Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R) has been widely adopted across cultures to assess common mental disorders. We assessed the factorial validity of the CIS‐R across ethnic minority groups, using data from a nationally representative survey conducted in England in 2000. The sample comprised White British (n = 837), Irish (n = 733), Black Caribbean (n = 694), Bangladeshi (n = 650), Indian (n = 643) and Pakistani (n = 724) respondents. Ordered logistic regression determined the reporting of CIS‐R symptoms. Principal components analysis (PCA) determined the underlying construct of the CIS‐R in White British participants. These factor solutions were then assessed for “best fit” using confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) across all ethnic groups. In ordered logistic regression analyses, there was heterogeneity in the reporting of worries, phobias, panic and somatic symptoms across ethnic minority groups relative to the White British group. “Best” fit solutions confirmed through CFA were models where all symptoms were allowed to vary across ethnic groups, or models where an underlying “depression‐anxiety” construct was held invariant while “somatic symptoms” were permitted to vary across groups, although differences between models assessed were slight. In conclusion, there may be benefits in assessing the functioning of certain CIS‐R items within specific cultural contexts to ensure adequate face validity of the CIS‐R. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2014-01-30 /pmc/articles/PMC4230331/ /pubmed/24478128 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1428 Text en © 2014 The Authors. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Das‐Munshi, Jayati
Castro‐Costa, Erico
Dewey, Michael E.
Nazroo, James
Prince, Martin
Cross‐cultural factorial validation of the Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R); findings from a nationally representative survey (EMPIRIC)
title Cross‐cultural factorial validation of the Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R); findings from a nationally representative survey (EMPIRIC)
title_full Cross‐cultural factorial validation of the Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R); findings from a nationally representative survey (EMPIRIC)
title_fullStr Cross‐cultural factorial validation of the Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R); findings from a nationally representative survey (EMPIRIC)
title_full_unstemmed Cross‐cultural factorial validation of the Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R); findings from a nationally representative survey (EMPIRIC)
title_short Cross‐cultural factorial validation of the Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised (CIS‐R); findings from a nationally representative survey (EMPIRIC)
title_sort cross‐cultural factorial validation of the clinical interview schedule – revised (cis‐r); findings from a nationally representative survey (empiric)
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4230331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24478128
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1428
work_keys_str_mv AT dasmunshijayati crossculturalfactorialvalidationoftheclinicalinterviewschedulerevisedcisrfindingsfromanationallyrepresentativesurveyempiric
AT castrocostaerico crossculturalfactorialvalidationoftheclinicalinterviewschedulerevisedcisrfindingsfromanationallyrepresentativesurveyempiric
AT deweymichaele crossculturalfactorialvalidationoftheclinicalinterviewschedulerevisedcisrfindingsfromanationallyrepresentativesurveyempiric
AT nazroojames crossculturalfactorialvalidationoftheclinicalinterviewschedulerevisedcisrfindingsfromanationallyrepresentativesurveyempiric
AT princemartin crossculturalfactorialvalidationoftheclinicalinterviewschedulerevisedcisrfindingsfromanationallyrepresentativesurveyempiric