The validity of three different versions of the general health questionnaire among general hospital inpatients

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S2) ◽  
pp. 536-536
Author(s):  
F. Friedrich ◽  
R. Alexandrowicz ◽  
N. Benda ◽  
M. Krautgartner ◽  
G. Cerny ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Hospital ◽  
General Health ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Scoring Methods ◽  
Scoring Method ◽  
Final Sample ◽  
Validity Indices ◽  
Research Interview ◽  
Hospital Inpatients

ObjectiveOriginally, the General Health Questionnaire (= GHQ) was designed to detect mental disorders among general medical outpatients and in community. The aim of the present survey is to compare the criterion validity indices of three different GHQ versions among general hospital inpatients when using different scoring methods.MethodThe GHQ-30 was filled in by inpatients prior to the research interview. For psychiatric case-identifiation the Clinical Interview Schedule was performed by three research psychiatrists.ResultsThe final sample consisted of 993 inpatients. When comparing the three different GHQ-versions, no significant differences were found in OMR and ROC-AUC as well as in sensitivity (0,612–0,701) and specificity (0,601–0759). When comparing the four scoring methods no significant differences were found in sensitivity. By contrast, OMR and specificity showed better indices for the 20 item and 12 item GHQ versions when using the bimodal and modified Lickert scoring method. Further, the Lickert scoring method showed no significant differences to the other scoring methods for the GHQ-30, where as the modified Lickert and the bimodal method showed lower OMR and higher specificity compared to the chronic method.ConclusionDue to the results of this survey, the future use of the chronic scoring method for the GHQ has to be questioned when used for general hospital inpatients.

Validity indices of the General Health Questionnaire among general hospital inpatients

2011 ◽  
Vol 38 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Friedrich ◽  
R Alexandrowicz ◽  
N Benda ◽  
G Cerny ◽  
J Wancata
Keyword(s):  
General Hospital ◽  
General Health ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Validity Indices ◽  
Hospital Inpatients

The Validity of the 12-Item General Health Questionnaire in Australia: A Comparison Between Three Scoring Methods

2001 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Donath
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
General Health ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Composite International Diagnostic Interview ◽  
Health Practitioner ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Scoring Methods ◽  
Scoring Method ◽  
Specificity And Sensitivity ◽  
Threshold Score

Objective: To investigate the specificity and sensitivity of three different scoring methods of the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) and hence to determine the best GHQ-12 threshold score for the detection of mental illness in community settings in Australia. Method: Secondary data analysis of the 1997 Australian National Survey of Health and Wellbeing (n = 10 641), using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview as the gold standard for diagnosis of mental illness. Results: The area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve for the C-GHQ scoring method was 0.84 (95% CI = 0.83–0.86) compared with the area for the standard scoring method of 0.78 (95% CI = 0.76–0.80). The best threshold with C-GHQ was 3/4, with sensitivity 82.9% (95% CI = 80.2–85.5%) and specificity 69.0% (95% CI = 68.6–69.4%). The best threshold score with the standard scoring method was 0/1, with sensitivity 75.4% (95% CI = 72.5–78.4%) and specificity 69.9% (95% CI = 69.5–70.3%). These were also the best thresholds for a subsample of the population who had consulted a health practitioner in the previous 4 weeks. Conclusion: In the Australian setting, the C-GHQ scoring method is preferable to the standard method of scoring the GHQ-12. In Australia the GHQ-12 appears to be a less useful instrument for detecting mental illness than in many other countries.

Validity of the Repeated Ghq among Pregnant Women: A Study in a Japanese General Hospital

1994 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshinori Kitamura ◽  
Mari A. Toda ◽  
Satoru Shima ◽  
Masumi Sugawara
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
General Hospital ◽  
Affective Disorders ◽  
General Health ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Antenatal Clinic ◽  
Discriminatory Power ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Validity Measures

Objective: The authors examined the variability of the validity of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) on two different occasions. Method: The subjects were 120 pregnant women attending an antenatal clinic of a general hospital in Japan. The GHQ was distributed twice—in the first and third trimesters. They were then interviewed by a psychiatrist blind to the GHQ scores using the standard and the “change” version of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (SADS). Results: Of the 120 women, 108 and ninety-eight completed the GHQ and were successfully interviewed in the first and third trimesters, respectively. Seventeen percent (18/108) and 13 percent (13/98) women were given RDC diagnoses in the first and third trimesters, respectively: They were designated as cases. Despite a satisfactory discriminatory power of the GHQ on the first occasion [1], the validity measures of the GHQ on the second occasion were generally poor. Thus, the sensitivity was 39 percent and specificity 82 percent for the cut-off point of 7/8. Conclusions: The GHQ should be validated separately when distributed repeatedly to the same subjects.

A comparison of the validity of two psychiatric screening questionnaires: the Arabic General Health Questionnaire (AGHQ) and Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20) in UAE, using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis

2001 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Ghubash ◽  
T. Daradkeh ◽  
O.F. El-Rufaie ◽  
M.T. Abou-Saleh
Keyword(s):  
Receiver Operating Characteristic ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
General Health ◽  
Roc Analysis ◽  
Operating Characteristic ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Validity Indices ◽  
Self Reporting Questionnaire ◽  
Receiver Operating

AbstractThis study compared the ability of the Arabic General Health questionnaire (AGHQ) and Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20) to screen ICD-10 psychiatric disorders in an Arab community in Al Ain, United Arab Emirates. Standardised psychiatric assessments of subjects using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) were carried out. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine validity indices for the AGHQ and SRQ-20. For the AGHQ, sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) were 86, 85 and 93% respectively, while for the SRQ-20, validity indices were 83, 83 and 90% respectively. Overall performance of the AGHQ was significantly better than the SRQ-20, especially in males and those under the age of 30 years. We conclude that both questionnaires are valid screening instruments in an Arab community in the UAE.

Psychiatric Disorder in the Community and the General Health Questionnaire

1987 ◽  
Vol 150 (6) ◽  
pp. 828-835 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. G. Surtees
Keyword(s):  
Psychiatric Disorder ◽  
General Health ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Scoring Method ◽  
Relative Operating Characteristic ◽  
General Population Study ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Item Responses

Goodchild & Duncan-Jones (1985) have proposed a new scoring method for Goldberg's General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) in which increased weight is given to item responses considered to indicate current (but chronic) affective disorders. This report examines both their revised and the conventional scoring of the GHQ in the context of a longitudinal general population study of psychiatric disorder among women. Sensitivity estimates based upon advised cut-points were found to be higher for the revised than for the conventional scoring scheme, and this difference remained when allowance was made for the duration for which disorders had been present prior to assessment with the GHQ. However, Relative Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed that while both forms of scoring the GHQ discriminated affective conditions (with or without allowance for their duration) there was no significant difference in their ability to do so. The justification therefore for the post-hoc interpretation of certain item responses as indicators of enduring affective states remains controversial and an issue for future research.

scholarly journals Construct validity and internal consistency of three factor structures and two scoring methods of the 12-item General Health Questionnaire

Biomédica ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel Simancas-Pallares ◽  
Katherine Margarita Arrieta ◽  
Luisa Leonor Arévalo
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
General Health ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Scoring Methods ◽  
Three Factor

Introducción. El análisis de las propiedades psicométricas de un instrumento reviste importancia para el control de sesgos en la medición.Objetivo. Comparar la validez de constructo y la consistencia interna de tres estructuras factoriales del cuestionario de salud general de 12 ítems.Materiales y métodos. Se hizo un estudio de validación en una muestra anidada de 483 estudiantes de odontología de Cartagena, Colombia. Además de las preguntas del instrumento, se hicieron otras sobre aspectos personales. Se evaluó la validez de constructo de la estructura unidimensional, de la unidimensional con corrección del sesgo de respuesta, y de la de dos y tres factores y sistemas de puntuación del tipo de la escala de Likert (0-1-2-3) y dicotómico (0-0-1-1). La validez se determinó con un análisis factorial confirmatorio y, la consistencia interna, con el coeficiente alfa de Cronbach para la escala de Likert y la fórmula 20 de Kuder-Richardson para el método dicotómico empleando los programas Stata™, versión 13.2 (Stata Corp, USA) y Mplus™, versión 7.11 (Muthen and Muthen, USA).Resultados. Los índices de ajuste revelaron que el mejor modelo era el unidimensional con corrección del sesgo de respuesta y puntación dicotómica (grados de libertad=36; ji al cuadrado=52,432; raíz cuadrada del error medio de aproximación=0,03; IC90% 0,008-0,048; índice comparativo de ajuste=0,982; índice de Tucker-Lewis=0,966). La consistencia interna fue de 0,70.Conclusiones. El ajuste del modelo obtenido en este estudio permitió controlar el sesgo de medición y, así, garantizar la validez externa de los resultados del uestionario de salud general de 12 ítems para la evaluación de las condiciones mentales en esta población. Las propiedades psicométricas de las escalas deben evaluarse críticamente antes del análisis de los resultados.

The value of an improved scoring system (CGHQ) for the General Health Questionnaire in a representative community sample

1988 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 1001-1006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felicia A. Huppert ◽  
Mauvis Gore ◽  
B. Jane Elliott
Keyword(s):  
General Health ◽  
Psychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Close Association ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Demographic Variables ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Scoring Method ◽  
Optimal Method ◽  
Community Residents

SynopsisThe value of a new method of scoring the General Health Questionnaire (CGHQ) has been assessed in a representative sample of 6317 British community residents aged 18 +. The CGHQ, which takes account of the chronicity of psychiatric symptoms, is found to be superior to the conventional scoring method in yielding a wider range of scores, a more normal distribution and in its close association to a well validated measure of neurotic illness.On the other hand, the conventional GHQ and the CGHQ score appear equally sensitive to a number of socio-demographic variables, including social class, marital status and employment. An important finding is that the two methods identify different individuals as cases. Compared with the GHQ, the CGHQ identifies a higher proportion of the middle-aged. The implications of these findings with respect to the optimal method of scoring the GHQ are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document