Research Note: Inter-Rater Reliability of the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale in a Psychogeriatric Population

Hildebrand, Roger; McCann, Erin; Nelson, Monty; Wass, Peter

doi:10.1017/s0714980800004542

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A second problem of the GAF is unreliability. Reported intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) for the GAF vary widely from, for example, .28 in a sample of learning-disorder patients (Oliver, Cooray, Tyrer, & Cicchetti, 2003) to .86 in a geriatric patient study (Hildebrand, McCann, Nelson, & Wass, 2003). Large measurement error when assessing intraindividual change in functioning also has been reported (Soderberg, Tungstrom, & Armelius, 2005).…”

Section: Functioning Assessment In Axis I Disordermentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualization of psychosocial functioning

Ro¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychosocial functioning is a broad construct that encompasses a wide range of behaviors. Impairment in one or more areas of functioning is commonly observed in psychiatric patients. Moreover, an enduring, rigid pattern of maladaptive behaviors (e.g., interpersonal conflict) are frequent manifestations of personality pathology. The purpose of this study was to understand this comprehensive, yet underexamined, construct of psychosocial functioning by studying the construct's structure and associations with external correlates (e.g., personality traits and pathology, mood symptoms). The study was conducted in two phases. In Phase 1 study, 429 community residents (student N = 218; community sample N = 211) were recruited and administered eight psychosocial functioning measures sampled from three psychosocial functioning domains: Daily functioning measures typically used in Axis I disorders, personality functioning measures developed for use with Axis II disorder, and quality of life/ satisfaction measures. Personality traits-specifically the big five personality traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness)-and mood/affect measures also were administered to understand their associations with psychosocial functioning scales. Results suggested that psychosocial functioning could be understood as having a threefactor structure: Positive General Functioning, Poor Personality Functioning, and Poor Basic Functioning. When four of the five personality traits were added as variables (Openness excluded), a four-factor structure emerged-Positive General Functioning, Poor Basic Functioning, Internalizing Dysfunction, and Externalizing Dysfunction-with personality traits strong markers of the psychosocial functioning factors with the exception of Basic Functioning. In Phase 2, psychiatric outpatients were recruited Above all, don't fear difficult moments. The best comes from them. Rita Levi-Montalcini iii iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project would not have existed without the help of my mentors. My first and foremost gratitude goes to my advisor, Lee Anna Clark. Ever since she has graciously accepted me into her lab, she has been the source of intellectual stimulation and support. This project could not have been completed without her encouragement and enthusiasm for our work together. Thank you so much, Lee Anna. I would also like to thank James Marchman for being an inspirational teacher. My gratitude also extends to David Watson for all his teaching, knowledge, and patience. I hope to be a good mentor to my future students as these amazing teachers were to me. I also would like to thank my classmates-Aliza, Lilian, Waki, Kim, and Lizfor their support. I could not have survived graduate school without these amazingly talented, warm friends. You are the best! I would like to extend my thanks to the Clark lab research assistants Vicki, Nicole, Stephanie, Jon, Erin, Suzie, Megan, Nam, and Kelly for their help with the project. Best wishes to you all. Finally, my hearty gratitude goes to my family...

show abstract

Section: Functioning Assessment In Axis I Disordermentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualization of psychosocial functioning

Ro¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In another vignette study, the inter-rater reliability was determined to be .79, again the ICC was used (Sonesson et al 2010). The GAF reliability was also assessed in an older adult population and was found to have an inter-rater reliability of .86 (Hildebrand et al 2003). This was based on an ICC comparing the ratings of three professionals: a psychologist, a physician, and a psychiatrist.…”

Section: Research Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric Properties of the Milestones of Recovery Scale-Older Adult Version

Hess

Fisher

Pilon

et al. 2016

Community Ment Health J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Milestones of Recovery Scale (MORS) is a tool that mental health professionals can use to track clients' recovery. It has been shown to have good reliability and validity in an adult population. It is important to demonstrate its psychometric properties among the elderly. This study assessed the reliability and validity of the MORS among a multi-ethnic (52 % White) sample of adults 54 and older (M = 67) at several mental health agencies in California. The clients, N = 432, were assessed by two raters each at two time points 2 weeks apart. Ratings were obtained on the MORS, the modified Global Assessment of Functioning scale (mGAF), and the Multnomah Community Ability Scale (MCAS). The MORS demonstrated acceptable reliability: inter-rater r = .65 and test-retest r = .71; the mGAF was .56 and .79; the MCAS was .66 and .85. The validity of the MORS was also supported: mGAF-MORS r = .68 and MCAS-MORS r = .74. This study lends support for the use of the MORS in older adult populations. In addition, this is the first report of the psychometric properties of the MCAS with an entirely older adult sample.

show abstract

“…The ICC of experts is generally higher than that of clinicians (Hilsenroth et al, 2000;Rey et al, 1995) and the ICC of trained clinicians is in turn higher compared to untrained clinicians (Söderberg et al, 2005;Vatnaland et al, 2007). Studies in inpatient settings and in outpatient settings have a similar coefficient distribution (Hildebrand et al 2003;Jovanović et al, 2008), and studies that use constructed case vignettes for the ratings in comparison to the use of patient produced information also show similar coefficients (Blake et al, 2007;Endicott et al, 1976). The ICC for all reviewed studies range from 0.33 to 0.91 and the mean value is calculated to 0.70.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the studies differ with regards to many characteristics. There are differences regarding number of raters, number of patients, databases, diagnosis of patients, age of patients, outpatient or inpatient units, trained or untrained raters, experts or clinicians (Blake, Cangelosi, Johnson-Brooks & Belcher, 2007; Hildebrand, McCann, Nelson & Wass, 2003; Hilsenroth, Ackerman, Blagys, Baumann, Baity, Smith et al, 2000; Jones, Thornicroft, Coffey & Dunn, 1995; Jovanović, Jasovíć Gaŝić, Ivković, Milovanović & Damjanović, 2008; Loevdahl & Friis, 1996; Michels, Siebel, Freyberger, Stieglitz, Schaub & Dilling, 1996; Pedersen, Hagtvet & Karterud, 2007; Ramirez, Ekselius & Ramklint, 2008; Rey, Starling, Wever, Dossetor & Plapp, 1995; Richard & Hall, 1995; Söderberg, Tungström & Armelius, 2005; Tracy, Adler, Rotrosen, Edson & Lavori, 1997; Vatnaland, Vatnaland, Friis & Opjordsmoen, 2007). For example Hilsenroth et al (2000) studied forty four patients in a university based clinic.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability of a functioning scale (GAF) among psychiatric ward staff

Sonesson¹,

Tjus

Arvidsson

2010

Nordic Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the reliability of the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF) when used by psychiatric staff from acute psychiatric wards. A special focus was attributed to factors predicting the reliability of the GAF.101 raters from six acute psychiatric wards assessed six GAF-vignettes. Intraclasscorrelation (ICC) with a model of absolute agreement was used as the overall reliability measure.An overall ICC of 0.79 was obtained. There were no significant differences found between the different occupational groups or psychiatric wards according to reliability. None of the predictive factors in the regression model yielded a significant contribution to reliability.The present study supports prior results of a reliability coefficient to be found mainly in the good to excellent range. There is supporting evidence that GAF ratings performed by trained psychiatric ward staff comprise a satisfactory reliability. The present study adds to prior research showing no consistent results between studies according to reliability factors. Further studies focusing on factors related to reliability are needed.

show abstract

Research Note: Inter-Rater Reliability of the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale in a Psychogeriatric Population

Cited by 4 publications

References 10 publications

Conceptualization of psychosocial functioning

Conceptualization of psychosocial functioning

Psychometric Properties of the Milestones of Recovery Scale-Older Adult Version

Reliability of a functioning scale (GAF) among psychiatric ward staff

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About