Psychometric properties of the Hoarding Rating Scale-Interview

Abstract

The present study tested the psychometric properties of an expanded version of the Hoarding Rating Scale (HRS-I), a semistructured interview for hoarding disorder (HD). Eighty-seven adults with HD and 44 healthy control (HC) participants were assessed using the HRS-I and completed a battery of self-report measures of HD severity, negative affect, and functional impairment. All interviews were audio recorded. From the HD participants, 21 were randomly selected for inter-rater reliability (IRR) analysis and 11 for test-retest reliability (TRR) analysis. The HRS-I showed excellent internal consistency (α = 0.87). IRR and TRR in the HD sample were good (intra-class coefficients = 0.81 and 0.85, respectively). HRS-I scores correlated strongly with scores on the self-report Saving Inventory-Revised (SI-R); partial correlations indicated that the HRS-I clutter, difficulty discarding, and acquiring items correlated significantly and at least moderately with corresponding SI-R subscales, when controlling for the other SI-R subscales. The HD group scored significantly higher on all items than did the HC group, with large effect sizes (d = 1.28 to 6.58). ROC analysis showed excellent sensitivity (1.00) and specificity (1.00) for distinguishing the HD and HC groups with a cutoff score of 11. Results and limitations are discussed in light of prior research.

Adaptation and psychometric testing of the hoarding rating scale (HRS): a self-administered screening scale for epidemiological study in Chinese population

“…Furthermore, our study assessed testretest reliability using the ICC (model 3) that is a more stringent and recommended method [39], while the original development study adopted the Pearson correlations, which might contribute to an overestimation of the correlation coefficients [45]. Hence, the developers have recently re-examined the test-retest reliability of HRS-I by 11 randomly selected samples with ICC of 0.81-85 [42]. Considering the 2-week test-retest reliability studies of Japanese HRS self-report version (ICC = 0.71 [43];), the current result was comparable and satisfactory.…”

“…These items seem the antecedent's causes of compulsivity, like a positive feedback mechanism of keeping high input but no output. The remaining two items (item 5 and 6) described the primary consequences of hoarding behaviors (i.e., the emotional distress and functional impairment) [42]. Error terms (representing measurement error of the items) is a unique variance that do not help in the measurement of the latent factor (compulsive hoarding).…”

“…A higher score indicated more severe CHB. The optimal cut-off score of 14 was determined to have a both a sensitivity and specificity of 0.97 for indicating CHB [41] and the latest analysis indicated a cut-off score of 11 that showed excellent sensitivity (1.00) and specificity (1.00) for distinguishing the hoarding disorder group and healthy control group [42].…”

“…The HRS-I assesses several domains of compulsive hoarding, including the level of cluttering, excessive acquisition, difficulties of discarding, associated distress and functional impairment [41]. The original HRS-I was scored on a nine-point scale (0 = none, 8 = extreme) and demonstrated a Cronbach's alpha of 0.87 to 0.97 for internal consistency and excellent test-retest reliability (r = 0.96; intraclass coefficients = 0.81-0.85) in a validation study of 87 [42] to 136 [41] subjects with or without compulsive hoarding or OCD. The HRS-I also yielded good known-group validity in the discrimination of hoarding and non-hoarding participants with or without OCD [41].…”

A clinician's quick guide to evidence‐based approaches: Hoarding disorder

“… Hoarding Rating Scale (HRS) (Tolin, Frost, & Steketee, ; Tolin, Gilliam, Davis, et al, ).—This 5‐item measure of HD severity can be clinician‐administered or used as a self‐report. A cut score of 11 indicates clinically significant hoarding symptoms on the clinician‐administered version of the Hoarding Rating Scale (Tolin et al, ). Saving Inventory‐Revised (SI‐R) (Frost, Steketee, & Grisham, ). A cut score of 41 on this 23‐item self‐report measure indicates clinically relevant HD symptoms (Tolin, Meunier, Frost, & Steketee, ). The Clutter Image Rating Scale (Frost, Steketee, Tolin, & Renaud, ).…”