The effect of the postdisaster context on the assessment of individual mental health scores
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9053418 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Tim R Wind (HealthNet TPO), P C Joshi (0000-0002-5857-0378, University of Delhi), Rolf J Kleber (0000-0003-2418-234X, Utrecht University), Ivan H Komproe (0000-0001-8084-8519, Utrecht University) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 84 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 134-141 |
| Publication date | 2014-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Journal of Orthopsychiatry (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-9432 • E-ISSN: 1939-0025 |
| Publisher | American Psychological Association (APA) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1037/h0099385 |
| PMID | 24826929 |
| OpenAlex | W2320777642 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 18 |
Many scholars question the immense variation in rates of mental health outcomes across disaster studies. This study explains this variation by putting forward 2 methodological problems that are inherent to the effect of a disaster context on mental health screening scores. The Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 was administered in a flood-affected group (n = 318) and a nonaffected group (n = 304) in Uttar Pradesh, India. The affected group showed much higher mean scores on subscales of anxiety and depression. However, factor analyses (i.e., confirmatory factor analyses [CFA] and multilevel confirmatory factor analyses [MCFA]; Muthén, 1994) revealed 2 methodological phenomena that account for the differences in scores. First, the outcomes revealed that a large proportion of covariance between observed mental health variables did not refer to the latent concepts of interest (depression and anxiety), but to the context of both groups (disaster affected vs. nonaffected). The shared effect of the disaster on the context explained a large proportion of the covariances between the items and biased outcomes. Second, after dissecting this group variance, the construct validity of the assessments of anxiety and depression was revealed to be poor and unstable across both groups. The subscales of anxiety and depression referred to different concepts in both groups. These 2 methodological problems have not been discussed thus far, but they contribute to the variation in mental health outcomes across disaster studies
Anxiety · Checklist · Confirmatory factor analysis · Context (archaeology) · Depression (economics) · Mental health · Psychiatry · Structural equation modeling · Clinical Psychology · Disaster Response and Management · Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research · Psychology · Resilience and Mental Health
Introducing Multilevel Modeling
Symptoms of Emotional Distress in a Family Planning Service
What Is an Intracluster Correlation Coefficient? Crucial Concepts for Primary Care Researchers
Effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on structural equation modeling fit indexes
Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis
The Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL)
Testing Structural Equation Models
Structural Equations with Latent Variables
Social capital and post-disaster mental health
Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures
Comparative fit indexes in structural models
The mechanisms that associate community social capital with post-disaster mental health
Intraclass correlations
Preparing Instruments for Transcultural Research
Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit
Transforming Normality into Pathology
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,57 |
| Citation span | 2019 - 2026 (8) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |