Article

Assessing local instrument reliability and validity: a field-based example from northern Uganda.

Dept. of Population and International Health, François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Social Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 2.58). 02/2009; 44(8):685-92. DOI: 10.1007/s00127-008-0475-1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This paper presents an approach for evaluating the reliability and validity of mental health measures in non-Western field settings. We describe this approach using the example of our development of the Acholi psychosocial assessment instrument (APAI), which is designed to assess depression-like (two tam, par and kumu), anxiety-like (ma lwor) and conduct problems (kwo maraco) among war-affected adolescents in northern Uganda. To examine the criterion validity of this measure in the absence of a traditional gold standard, we derived local syndrome terms from qualitative data and used self reports of these syndromes by indigenous people as a reference point for determining caseness. Reliability was examined using standard test-retest and inter-rater methods. Each of the subscale scores for the depression-like syndromes exhibited strong internal reliability ranging from alpha = 0.84-0.87. Internal reliability was good for anxiety (0.70), conduct problems (0.83), and the pro-social attitudes and behaviors (0.70) subscales. Combined inter-rater reliability and test-retest reliability were good for most subscales except for the conduct problem scale and prosocial scales. The pattern of significant mean differences in the corresponding APAI problem scale score between self-reported cases vs. noncases on local syndrome terms was confirmed in the data for all of the three depression-like syndromes, but not for the anxiety-like syndrome ma lwor or the conduct problem kwo maraco.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Ivelina Borisova, Jun 23, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
160 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose.Global mental health movements increasingly highlight social integration as a key outcome for mental health services. This creates a pressing need to better articulate and measure this outcome. Much of the work in social integration thus far has been in high-income countries (HIC), and is not directly applicable across diverse socio-cultural environments. We discuss promising concepts and measures of social integration with potential for global cross-cultural application. Then, we present some of the challenges of developing measures for global and cross-cultural use, and suggest ways to confront these challenges. Although we focus primarily on adults with severe mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), the questions we raise are also relevant to children, other mental disorders and HIC.Findings.We identify and describe four distinct conceptual frameworks for social integration that have emerged over the past decade. Then, we discuss the challenge of developing corresponding measures, and the further challenge of developing global cross-cultural measures. We suggest that a key concept shared across much previous and emerging work is active participation in community and civic life. As a platform for future development of global cross-cultural measures of this and other concepts, we propose guidelines and present examples of feasible, previously used strategies.Summary.Emerging concepts of social integration hold great promise, but as yet, there are no corresponding measures suitable for global cross-cultural use. We propose that it is feasible to develop such measures, and that their development will facilitate the advance of community mental health services and the science of global mental health.
    Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 05/2012; 22(1):1-9. DOI:10.1017/S2045796012000303 · 3.36 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Children and adolescents exposed to armed conflict are at high risk of developing mental health problems. To date, a range of psychosocial approaches and clinical/psychiatric interventions has been used to address mental health needs in these groups. To provide an overview of peer-reviewed psychosocial and mental health interventions designed to address mental health needs of conflict-affected children, and to highlight areas in which policy and research need strengthening. We used standard review methodology to identify interventions aimed at improving or treating mental health problems in conflict-affected youth. An ecological lens was used to organize studies according to the individual, family, peer/school, and community factors targeted by each intervention. Interventions were also evaluated for their orientation toward prevention, treatment, or maintenance, and for the strength of the scientific evidence of reported effects. Of 2305 studies returned from online searches of the literature and 21 sources identified through bibliography mining, 58 qualified for full review, with 40 peer-reviewed studies included in the final narrative synthesis. Overall, the peer-reviewed literature focused largely on school-based interventions. Very few family and community-based interventions have been empirically evaluated. Only two studies assessed multilevel or stepped-care packages. The evidence base on effective and efficacious interventions for conflict-affected youth requires strengthening. Postconflict development agendas must be retooled to target the vulnerabilities characterizing conflict-affected youth, and these approaches must be collaborative across bodies responsible for the care of youth and families.
    Harvard Review of Psychiatry 03/2013; 21(2):70-91. DOI:10.1097/HRP.0b013e318283bf8f · 2.49 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We evaluate caregiver and adolescent concordance on adolescent mental health severity in war-affected Northern Uganda. Data were collected from 628 caregiver-adolescent dyads in two internally displaced persons’ camps. Internalizing and externalizing-type mental health problems were assessed using locally-developed scales. To evaluate concordance, mean caregiver and adolescent scores on each scale were compared using Pearson’s correlation coefficients and within-pair-differences were compared by subtracting caregiver from adolescent responses and using t tests to assess whether these differed from 0. Mental heath problem type and youth/caregiver gender and age were investigated as potential indicators of group differences. Adolescents consistently rated their problems as more severe for internalizing problems and less severe for externalizing problems compared with caregivers. Mothers’ reports exhibited better concordance for internalizing problems while fathers’ and other caregivers’ exhibited better concordance of externalizing problems. Results suggest researchers and program implementers need to be aware of respondent differences when planning studies and services.
    Journal of Child and Family Studies 08/2013; DOI:10.1007/s10826-013-9755-9 · 1.42 Impact Factor