Validity of DSM-IV Axis V Global Assessment of Relational Functioning Scale

Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Psychology Assessment Center, 1 Bowdoin Square, 7th Floor, Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2919, USA.
The Journal of nervous and mental disease (Impact Factor: 1.69). 01/2009; 197(1):50-5. DOI: 10.1097/NMD.0b013e3181923ca1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We investigate the convergent validity of the DSM-IV Axis V Global Assessment of Relational Functioning Scale (GARF; American Psychiatric Association, 1994). This study included 79 patients at a university-based outpatient treatment clinic. We examined clinician-rated GARF and the relationship to self-reported (Inventory of Interpersonal Problems; IIP-C; Horowitz et al. 2000) and free response themes [Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale: SCORS; Hilsenroth, Stein & Pinsker, 2004; Westen, 1995] of interpersonal functioning. Clinician ratings of the GARF scale and SCORS variables were highly reliable and internally consistent. Convergent Validity among the GARF, SCORS, and IIP scores was calculated using a Principal Components Analysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Results of the Principal Components Analysis revealed that the GARF, SCORS, and IIP scores converged on a single factor, although findings of the CFA did not fully confirm the 1 factor model originally proposed. Intercorrelations among the GARF, SCORS, and IIP variables were analyzed and a pattern of significant relationships was found between the GARF and SCORS variables. This study helps support the convergent validity GARF as a relational functioning measure and is one of the first investigations to examine this scale multidimensionally.

Download full-text


Available from: Michelle B Stein, Mar 11, 2015
1 Follower
47 Reads
  • Source
    • " and SCORS – G ratings . Past research with adult samples has also reported similar findings ( Pinsker - Aspen , Stein , & Hilsenroth , 2007 ) . We also found that the SCORS – G composite ratings were positively correlated to the patients ' GAF scores . This pro - vides convergent validity as similar results were found in past SCORS – G research ( Stein et al . , 2009 ) . We would expect that those who have healthier self - and interpersonal functioning capacities would lead to better coping capacities and overall"
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Rating Method (SCORS-G) is a clinical rating system assessing eight domains of self and interpersonal relational experience which can be applied to narrative response data (e.g., Thematic Apperception Test [TAT; Murray, 1943]; early memories narratives) or oral data (e.g., psychotherapy narratives, Relationship Anecdotal Paradigms). In the current study, seventy-two psychiatrically hospitalized adolescents consented and were rated by their individual and group therapist using the SCORS-G. Clinicians also rated therapy engagement, personality functioning, quality of peer relationships, school functioning, global assessment of functioning (GAF), history of eating disordered behavior and history of nonsuicidal self-injury. SCORS-G composite ratings achieved an acceptable level of inter-rater reliability and were associated with theoretically predicted variables (e.g., engagement in therapy; history of nonsuicidal self-injury). SCORS-G ratings also incrementally improved the prediction of therapy engagement and global functioning beyond what was accounted for by GAF scores. This study further demonstrates the clinical utility of the SCORS-G with adolescents.
    Journal of Personality Assessment 08/2014; 97(1). DOI:10.1080/00223891.2014.930744 · 2.01 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "These three constructs have been used in other global functioning measures such as the CGAS and the GAF (Bird, 1999; Bird et al., 1987; Winters et al., 2005). In addition, the inclusion of a dimensional assessment of personality functioning into the Overall Functioning Scale (OFS) was supported by work showing how personality pathology affects overall functioning (Kuurmann and Hilsenroth, 2012; Peters et al., 2005; Stein et al., 2009; Westen and Arkowitz- Westen, 1998; Zittel-Conklin and Westen, 2005). Personality pathology in adolescents has also been linked to other psychiatric disorders (for review, see Shiner and Tackett, 2014). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The current study looks to evaluate the validity and reliability of a brief measure of overall functioning for adolescents. Clinicians were asked to complete the Overall Functioning Scale for 72 adolescents consecutively admitted to the adolescent psychiatric inpatient service of a community safety net medical center. The results revealed that this new measure is related to the patients’ length of stay, clinician-rated measures of social cognition and object relations, Global Assessment of Functioning score at admission, and global rating of engagement in individual psychotherapy. Results also showed that the OFS was related to patients’ history of non-suicidal self-harm as well as treatment outcome as assessed by measures of psychological health and well-being and symtomatology. Hierarchical regressions reveal that the OFS shows incremental validity above the admission GAF score in predicting length of stay. The results also showed that the OFS demonstrates inter-rater reliability in the excellent range (ICC 1,2) of .88. Clinical implications of the use of this tool as well as areas of future research are discussed.
    Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease 08/2014; 202(11). DOI:10.1097/NMD.0000000000000200 · 1.69 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim: Clinical practice improvement carried out in a quality assurance framework relies on routinely collected data using clinical indicators. Herein we describe the development, minimum training requirements, and inter-rater agreement of indicators that were used in an Australian multi-site evaluation of the effectiveness of early psychosis (EP) teams. Methods: Surveys of clinician opinion and face-to-face consensus-building meetings were used to select and conceptually define indicators. Operationalization of definitions was achieved by iterative refinement until clinicians could be quickly trained to code indicators reliably. Calculation of percentage agreement with expert consensus coding was based on ratings of paper-based clinical vignettes embedded in a 2-h clinician training package. Results: Consensually agreed upon conceptual definitions for seven clinical indicators judged most relevant to evaluating EP teams were operationalized for ease-of-training. Brief training enabled typical clinicians to code indicators with acceptable percentage agreement (60% to 86%). For indicators of suicide risk, psychosocial function, and family functioning this level of agreement was only possible with less precise ‘broad range’ expert consensus scores. Estimated kappa values indicated fair to good inter-rater reliability (kappa > 0.65). Inspection of contingency tables (coding category by health service) and modal scores across services suggested consistent, unbiased coding across services. Conclusions: Clinicians are able to agree upon what information is essential to routinely evaluate clinical practice. Simple indicators of this information can be designed and coding rules can be reliably applied to written vignettes after brief training. The real world feasibility of the indicators remains to be tested in field trials.
    Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 12/2010; 45(1):63-75. DOI:10.3109/00048674.2010.524621 · 3.41 Impact Factor
Show more