Dataset Information

The Dunn Worry Questionnaire and the Paranoia Worries Questionnaire: new assessments of worry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The cognitive process of worry, which keeps negative thoughts in mind and elaborates the content, contributes to the occurrence of many mental health disorders. Our principal aim was to develop a straightforward measure of general problematic worry suitable for research and clinical treatment. Our secondary aim was to develop a measure of problematic worry specifically concerning paranoid fears.

Methods

An item pool concerning worry in the past month was evaluated in 250 non-clinical individuals and 50 patients with psychosis in a worry treatment trial. Exploratory factor analysis and item response theory (IRT) informed the selection of scale items. IRT analyses were repeated with the scales administered to 273 non-clinical individuals, 79 patients with psychosis and 93 patients with social anxiety disorder. Other clinical measures were administered to assess concurrent validity. Test-retest reliability was assessed with 75 participants. Sensitivity to change was assessed with 43 patients with psychosis.

Results

A 10-item general worry scale (Dunn Worry Questionnaire; DWQ) and a five-item paranoia worry scale (Paranoia Worries Questionnaire; PWQ) were developed. All items were highly discriminative (DWQ a = 1.98-5.03; PWQ a = 4.10-10.7), indicating small increases in latent worry lead to a high probability of item endorsement. The DWQ was highly informative across a wide range of the worry distribution, whilst the PWQ had greatest precision at clinical levels of paranoia worry. The scales demonstrated excellent internal reliability, test-retest reliability, concurrent validity and sensitivity to change.

Conclusions

The new measures of general problematic worry and worry about paranoid fears have excellent psychometric properties.

SUBMITTER: Freeman D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7168652 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Dunn Worry Questionnaire and the Paranoia Worries Questionnaire: new assessments of worry.

Freeman Daniel D Bird Jessica C JC Loe Bao S BS Kingdon David D Startup Helen H Clark David M DM Ehlers Anke A Černis Emma E Wingham Gail G Evans Nicole N Lister Rachel R Pugh Katherine K Cordwell Jacinta J Dunn Graham G

Psychological medicine 20190405 5

<h4>Background</h4>The cognitive process of worry, which keeps negative thoughts in mind and elaborates the content, contributes to the occurrence of many mental health disorders. Our principal aim was to develop a straightforward measure of general problematic worry suitable for research and clinical treatment. Our secondary aim was to develop a measure of problematic worry specifically concerning paranoid fears.<h4>Methods</h4>An item pool concerning worry in the past month was evaluated in 25 ...[more]

PMID: 30947766

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveCommonly used measures of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) do not capture activities for a technologically advancing society. This study aimed to adapt the proxy/informant-based Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire (A-IADL-Q) for use in the UK and develop a self-report version.DesignAn iterative mixed method cross-cultural adaptation of the A-IADL-Q and the development of a self-report version involving a three-step design: (1) interviews and focus groups with lay and professional stakeholders to assess face and content validity; (2) a questionnaire to measure item relevance to older adults in the U.K.; (3) a pilot of the adapted questionnaire in people with cognitive impairment.SettingCommunity settings in the UK.ParticipantsOne hundred and forty-eight participants took part across the three steps: (1) 14 dementia professionals; 8 people with subjective cognitive decline (SCD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or dementia due to Alzheimer's disease; and 6 relatives of people with MCI or dementia; (2) 92 older adults without cognitive impairment; and (3) 28 people with SCD or MCI.MeasurementsThe cultural relevance and applicability of the A-IADL-Q scale items were assessed using a 6-point Likert scale. Cognitive and functional performance was measured using a battery of cognitive and functional measures.ResultsIterative modifications to the scale resulted in a 55-item adapted version appropriate for UK use (A-IADL-Q-UK). Pilot data revealed that the new and revised items performed well. Four new items correlated with the weighted average score (Kendall's Tau -.388, -.445, -.497, -.569). An exploratory analysis of convergent validity found correlations in the expected direction with cognitive and functional measures.ConclusionThe A-IADL-Q-UK provides a measurement of functional decline for use in the UK that captures culturally relevant activities. A new self-report version has been developed and is ready for testing. Further evaluation of the A-IADL-Q-UK for construct validity is now needed.

Project description:IntroductionContemporary validity testing theory holds that validity lies in the extent to which a proposed interpretation and use of test scores is justified, the evidence for which is dependent on both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Despite this, we hypothesise that development and validation studies for assessments in the field of health primarily report a limited range of statistical properties, and that a systematic theoretical framework for validity testing is rarely applied. Using health literacy assessments as an exemplar, this paper outlines a protocol for a systematic descriptive literature review about types of validity evidence being reported and if the evidence is reported within a theoretical framework.Methods and analysisA systematic descriptive literature review of qualitative and quantitative research will be used to investigate the scope of validation practice in the rapidly growing field of health literacy assessment. This review method employs a frequency analysis to reveal potentially interpretable patterns of phenomena in a research area; in this study, patterns in types of validity evidence reported, as assessed against the criteria of the 2014 Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, and in the number of studies using a theoretical validity testing framework. The search process will be consistent with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. Outcomes of the review will describe patterns in reported validity evidence, methods used to generate the evidence and theoretical frameworks underpinning validation practice and claims. This review will inform a theoretical basis for future development and validity testing of health assessments in general.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this systematic review because only published research will be examined. Dissemination of the review findings will be through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, at conference presentations and in the lead author's doctoral thesis.

Dataset Information

The Dunn Worry Questionnaire and the Paranoia Worries Questionnaire: new assessments of worry.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The Dunn Worry Questionnaire and the Paranoia Worries Questionnaire: new assessments of worry.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets