IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0182162.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychometric analysis of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) in primary care using modern item response theory

Author

Listed:
  • Pascal Jordan
  • Meike C Shedden-Mora
  • Bernd Löwe

Abstract

Objective: The Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) is one of the most frequently used diagnostic self-report scales for screening, diagnosis and severity assessment of anxiety disorder. Its psychometric properties from the view of the Item Response Theory paradigm have rarely been investigated. We aimed to close this gap by analyzing the GAD-7 within a large sample of primary care patients with respect to its psychometric properties and its implications for scoring using Item Response Theory. Methods: Robust, nonparametric statistics were used to check unidimensionality of the GAD-7. A graded response model was fitted using a Bayesian approach. The model fit was evaluated using posterior predictive p-values, item information functions were derived and optimal predictions of anxiety were calculated. Results: The sample included N = 3404 primary care patients (60% female; mean age, 52,2; standard deviation 19.2) The analysis indicated no deviations of the GAD-7 scale from unidimensionality and a decent fit of a graded response model. The commonly suggested ultra-brief measure consisting of the first two items, the GAD-2, was supported by item information analysis. The first four items discriminated better than the last three items with respect to latent anxiety. Conclusion: The information provided by the first four items should be weighted more heavily. Moreover, estimates corresponding to low to moderate levels of anxiety show greater variability. The psychometric validity of the GAD-2 was supported by our analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Pascal Jordan & Meike C Shedden-Mora & Bernd Löwe, 2017. "Psychometric analysis of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) in primary care using modern item response theory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-14, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0182162
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182162
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0182162
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0182162&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0182162?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Curtis, S. McKay, 2010. "BUGS Code for Item Response Theory," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 36(c01).
    2. Denny Borsboom, 2006. "The attack of the psychometricians," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 71(3), pages 425-440, September.
    3. van der Ark, L. Andries, 2007. "Mokken Scale Analysis in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 20(i11).
    4. Rosseel, Yves, 2012. "lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i02).
    5. Paul Rosenbaum, 1984. "Testing the conditional independence and monotonicity assumptions of item response theory," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 425-435, September.
    6. Klaas Sijtsma, 2009. "On the Use, the Misuse, and the Very Limited Usefulness of Cronbach’s Alpha," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 107-120, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sonia OREFICCE & Climent Quintana-Domeque, 2021. "Gender inequality in COVID-19 times: evidence from UK prolific participants," JODE - Journal of Demographic Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 261-287, June.
    2. Taha Hannachi & Sonya Yakimova & Alain Somat, 2024. "A Follow up on the Continuum Theory of Eco-Anxiety: Analysis of the Climate Change Anxiety Scale Using Item Response Theory among French Speaking Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(9), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Ibraheem M. Karaye & Nadia Koyratty & Stephanie Rogus & Lauren Clay, 2022. "Association between Food Worry and Self-Rated Mental Health during the COVID-19 Pandemic," World, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-10, November.
    4. Sowmya Kshtriya & Jacqueline Lawrence & Holly M. Kobezak & Paula J. Popok & Sarah Lowe, 2022. "Investigating Strategies of Emotion Regulation As Mediators of Occupational Stressors and Mental Health Outcomes in First Responders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-13, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ulrich Schroeders & Oliver Wilhelm & Gabriel Olaru, 2016. "Meta-Heuristics in Short Scale Construction: Ant Colony Optimization and Genetic Algorithm," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Chun Wang & Steven W. Nydick, 2020. "On Longitudinal Item Response Theory Models: A Didactic," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 45(3), pages 339-368, June.
    3. Jesper Tijmstra & Maria Bolsinova, 2019. "Bayes Factors for Evaluating Latent Monotonicity in Polytomous Item Response Theory Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(3), pages 846-869, September.
    4. Mercy Gloria Ashepet & Liesbet Vranken & Caroline Michellier & Olivier Dewitte & Rodgers Mutyebere & Clovis Kabaseke & Ronald Twongyirwe & Violet Kanyiginya & Grace Kagoro-Rugunda & Tine Huyse & Liesb, 2024. "Assessing scale reliability in citizen science motivational research: lessons learned from two case studies in Uganda," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Lena Busch & Till Utesch & Bernd Strauss, 2019. "Validation of the vignette-based German Exercise Causality Orientation Scale (G-ECOS)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Bastiaan Bruinsma, 2020. "A comparison of measures to validate scales in voting advice applications," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 1299-1316, August.
    7. Tormod Bøe & Mari Hysing & Jens Christoffer Skogen & Kyrre Breivik, 2016. "The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): Factor Structure and Gender Equivalence in Norwegian Adolescents," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, May.
    8. Érika Martins Silva Ramos & Cecilia Jakobsson Bergstad, 2021. "The Psychology of Sharing: Multigroup Analysis among Users and Non-Users of Carsharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, June.
    9. Coromina, Lluís & Camprubí, Raquel, 2016. "Analysis of tourism information sources using a Mokken Scale perspective," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 75-84.
    10. Jules Ellis, 2014. "An Inequality for Correlations in Unidimensional Monotone Latent Variable Models for Binary Variables," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 303-316, April.
    11. Wickelmaier, Florian & Strobl, Carolin & Zeileis, Achim, 2012. "Psychoco: Psychometric Computing in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i01).
    12. Myszkowski, Nils & Storme, Martin, 2018. "A snapshot of g? Binary and polytomous item-response theory investigations of the last series of the Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM-LS)," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 109-116.
    13. Jules L. Ellis & Klaas Sijtsma, 2023. "A Test to Distinguish Monotone Homogeneity from Monotone Multifactor Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 387-412, June.
    14. Hartung, Johanna & Goecke, Benjamin & Schroeders, Ulrich & Schmitz, Florian & Wilhelm, Oliver, 2022. "Latin square tasks: A multi-study evaluation," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    15. Hernán Bejarano & Pedro Hancevic & Yadira Peralta, 2024. "Pro-Environmental Values and Energy Practices in Mexican Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Insights from the New Ecological Paradigm," Working Papers DTE 636, CIDE, División de Economía.
    16. Rudy Ligtvoet, 2022. "Incomplete Tests of Conditional Association for the Assessment of Model Assumptions," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1214-1237, December.
    17. Sonia Nawrocka & Hans De Witte & Margherita Pasini & Margherita Brondino, 2023. "A Person-Centered Approach to Job Insecurity: Is There a Reciprocal Relationship between the Quantitative and Qualitative Dimensions of Job Insecurity?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(7), pages 1-27, March.
    18. Md. Mominur Rahman & Bilkis Akhter, 2021. "The impact of investment in human capital on bank performance: evidence from Bangladesh," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Masashi Soga & Kevin J. Gaston & Yuichi Yamaura & Kiyo Kurisu & Keisuke Hanaki, 2016. "Both Direct and Vicarious Experiences of Nature Affect Children’s Willingness to Conserve Biodiversity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-12, May.
    20. César Merino-Soto & Gina Chávez-Ventura & Verónica López-Fernández & Guillermo M. Chans & Filiberto Toledano-Toledano, 2022. "Learning Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-L): Psychometric and Measurement Invariance Evidence in Peruvian Undergraduate Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0182162. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.