2026-05-31T12:16:00Z https://datacatalogue.cessda.eu/oai-pmh/v0/oai

f6ac155fb91137761bce544cd5b727979c11e13e3bce36bd47d2273a4e661f2c 2025-12-08T01:51:29Z language:enopenaire_data

Identifying levels of general distress in first line mental health services: Can GP- and eHealth clients’ scores be meaningfully compared? Identifying levels of general distress in first line mental health services: Can GP- and eHealth clients’ scores be meaningfully compared? doi:10.17026/DANS-Z92-YEVQeasy-dataset:68116 J. van Bebber 2017-02-09 DANS Data Station Social Sciences and Humanities 2017-02-28 Social Sciencesstresseerstelijns gezondheidszorgFour-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ) <p>Background<br>The Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire1 is a self-report questionnaire developed in the Netherlands to distinguish non-specific general distress from depression, anxiety, and somatization. This questionnaire is often used in different populations and settings and is being applied with different mediums (paper and pencil versus computerized).</p><p>Methods<br>We used item response theory to investigate whether the 4DSQ measures the same construct (structural invariance) in the same way (scalar invariance) in two samples comprised of primary mental health care attendees: (i) clients who visited their General Practitioner responded to the 4DSQ by paper and pencil, and (ii) eHealth clients. Specifically, we investigated whether the distress items function differently in eHealth clients compared to General Practitioners’ clients and whether these differences lead to substantial differences at scale level.</p><p>Results<br>Results showed that in general structural invariance holds for the distress scale. This means that the distress scale measures the same construct in both General Practitioners’ clients and eHealth clients. Furthermore, although eHealth clients have higher observed distress scores than General Practitioners’ clients, application of a multiple group generalized partial credit response model suggests that scalar invariance holds.</p><p>Conclusions<br>Thus, the same cutoff scores can be used for classifying respondents as having low, moderate and high levels of distress in both settings.</p><p>a) Q4DKL01-Q4DKL50: Item scores (0-4) 4DSQ;<br>b)Q4DKL01_rec-Q4DKL50_rec: Recoded item scores (0-2) 4DSQ (2,3,4 > 2);<br>c) Q4DKL01alt-Q4DKL50alt: Alternative raw item scores (1-5);<br>d) Q4DKL01_recalt-Q4DKL50_recalt: Alternative recoded item scores (1-3);</p> https://ssh.datastations.nl/oai doi:10.17026/DANS-Z92-YEVQ 2025-12-03T01:00:46Z ddi:codebook:2_5