Background: The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is the most widely and frequently used scale to assess positive and negative affect. The PANAS has been validated in several languages, and it has shown excellent psychometric properties in the general population and some clinical samples, such as forensic samples, substance users, and adult women with fibromyalgia. Nevertheless, the psychometric properties of the scale have not yet been examined in clinical samples with anxiety, depressive, and adjustment disorders. In addition, the proliferation of Internet-based treatments has led to the development of a wide range of assessments conducted online with digital versions of pen and paper self-report questionnaires. However, no validations have been carried out to analyze the psychometric properties of the online version of the PANAS. The present study investigates the psychometric properties of the online Spanish version of the PANAS in a clinical sample of individuals with emotional disorders. Methods: The sample was composed of 595 Spanish adult volunteers with a diagnosis of depressive disorder (n = 237), anxiety disorder (n = 284), or adjustment disorder (n = 74). Factor structure, construct validity, internal consistency, and sensitivity to change were analyzed. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis yielded a latent structure of two independent factors, consistent with previous validations of the instrument. The analyses showed adequate convergent and discriminant validity, good internal consistency as well as sensitivity to change. Conclusions: Overall, the results obtained in this study show that the online version of the PANAS has adequate psychometric properties for the assessment of positive and negative affect in a Spanish clinical population.
IntroductionAn important concern in Internet-based treatments (IBTs) for emotional disorders is the high dropout rate from these protocols. Although dropout rates are usually reported in research studies, very few studies qualitatively explore the experiences of patients who drop out of IBTs. Examining the experiences of these clients may help to find ways to tackle this problem.MethodA Consensual Qualitative Research study was applied in 10 intentionally-selected patients who dropped out of a transdiagnostic IBT.Results22 categories were identified within 6 domains. Among the clients an undeniable pattern arose regarding the insufficient support due to the absence of a therapist and the lack of specificity of the contents to their own problems.ConclusionsThe analyzed content has direct impact on the clinical application of IBTs. A more tailored manage of expectations as well as strategies to enhance the therapeutic relationship in certain clients are identified as the two key elements in order to improve the dropout in IBTs. Going further, in the mid and long run, ideographic interventions would be vital. The present study permits to better grasp the phenomenon of dropout in IBTs and delineate specific implications both in terms of research, training and practice.
The Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) is a self-report questionnaire designed to evaluate the severity and functional impairment associated with anxiety. Given its transdiagnostic nature, it can be used indistinctly across anxiety and depressive disorders. In this study, the psychometric properties of the online version of the OASIS were evaluated in a Spanish clinical sample with emotional disorders. Patients (n = 583) with anxiety (n = 250) and depression (n = 333) with a mean age of 37.21 (SD = 12.22), underwent a diagnostic interview and questionnaires assessing anxiety, depression, positive and negative affect, and quality of life. Factorial structure, internal consistency, convergent and discriminant validity, cutoff scores, and sensitivity to change were analyzed. Confirmatory Factor Analysis yielded a unidimensional factor structure, consistent with previous validations of the instrument. The analyses showed good internal consistency and adequate convergent and discriminant validity, as well as sensitivity to change. A cutoff score of 7.5 was found to meet the criteria used in this study to select the optimal cutoff point. Overall, in this study, the psychometric properties of the online version of the OASIS were found to be appropriate. The brevity and ease of use of the OASIS support its adequacy as a valid measure of anxiety severity and impairment in Spanish clinical samples with anxiety and depression.
The advantages of transdiagnostic protocols for emotional disorders (ED) (anxiety and depression) include the ability to treat multiple psychological disorders using the same treatment protocol, and the capacity to better address comorbidity. Comorbidity in ED has been associated with higher rates of severity, functional impairment, and chronicity. However, no attempts have been made in the literature to systematically review whether these studies include assessments to evaluate the treatment response in comorbid diagnoses, in addition to the principal diagnosis. Moreover, transdiagnostic treatments have been developed for a range of ED, but to date no study has analyzed the real distribution of diagnoses in these studies. The current study aimed to analyze: a) whether treatment response in comorbidity is evaluated in transdiagnostic treatments for ED; b) what diagnoses are targeted in transdiagnostic treatments for ED; and c) the real distribution of the diagnoses at baseline in these studies. A systematic search of the literature was conducted in PsycINFO, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Fifty-two randomized controlled trials were identified, with a total of 7007 adult participants. The results showed that, although most of the studies reported data on comorbidity at baseline, only 40% of them examined the effects of the intervention on the comorbid disorders. The most commonly targeted diagnoses in transdiagnostic protocols were panic/agoraphobia, generalized anxiety, social anxiety, and depression. Other disorders, such as obsessive-compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and anxiety/depression not otherwise specified, were marginally included in these studies. Regarding the distribution of diagnoses at baseline, generalized anxiety, panic/agoraphobia, social anxiety, and depression were the most frequently observed, whereas depression not otherwise specified was the least represented. The results highlight the importance of assessing comorbidity in addition to the principal diagnoses in transdiagnostic treatments, in order to draw conclusions about the true potential of these interventions to improve comorbid symptoms. Implications of the current study and directions for future research are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.