On the psychometric validity of the domains of the PDSQ: an illustration of the bi-factor item response theory model.

Competing item response theory (IRT) models were used to test the factor structure of the psychiatric diagnostic screening questionnaire (PDSQ; Zimmerman M, Mattia JI. A self-report scale to help make psychiatric diagnoses: the psychiatric diagnostic screening questionnaire. Archives of General Psychiatry 2001;58:787-94), a self-report psychiatric measure comprised of 139 items sampled from 15 symptom domains (e.g., Psychosis, Mania). Tested IRT models included: (a) a unidimensional model, (b) a simple structure model, (c) a bi-factor model, and (d) models that included 6, 10, and 15 sub-domain alternative conceptualizations of the scale. Based on the responses of 3791 individuals with major depressive disorder, the bi-factor model was found to provide a theoretically and statistically plausible description of the PDSQ factor structure. Primary dimension loadings were low to moderate; group factor loadings were moderate to high. Results support the validity of the PDSQ in identifying distinct categories of illness as defined by the diagnostic and statistical manual diagnostic groups, since preserving the 15 symptom categories (domains) provided a more accurate characterization of the observed data by the IRT models. The bi-factor model is useful in evaluating the multidimensional structure of mental health data. The specification of alternative IRT models is demonstrated as a noteworthy benefit over classical test theory for psychiatric measurement.

[1]  K. Holzinger,et al.  The Bi-factor method , 1937 .

[2]  F. Lord Applications of Item Response Theory To Practical Testing Problems , 1980 .

[3]  Christine E. DeMars Application of the Bi-Factor Multidimensional Item Response Theory Model to Testlet-Based Tests. , 2006 .

[4]  R. D. Bock,et al.  High-dimensional maximum marginal likelihood item factor analysis by adaptive quadrature , 2005 .

[5]  Donald Hedeker,et al.  Full-Information Item Bifactor Analysis of Graded Response Data , 2007 .

[6]  D. Kupfer,et al.  Sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression (STAR*D): rationale and design. , 2004, Controlled clinical trials.

[7]  K. Jöreskog A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis , 1969 .

[8]  L. Tucker An inter-battery method of factor analysis , 1958 .

[9]  David J. Weiss,et al.  Using computerized adaptive testing to reduce the burden of mental health assessment. , 2008, Psychiatric services.

[10]  L. Dixon,et al.  Religiosity, psychosocial adjustment, and subjective burden of persons who care for those with mental illness. , 2006, Psychiatric services.

[11]  S. West,et al.  A Comparison of Bifactor and Second-Order Models of Quality of Life , 2006, Multivariate behavioral research.

[12]  M. Zimmerman,et al.  A self-report scale to help make psychiatric diagnoses: the Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire. , 2001, Archives of general psychiatry.

[13]  Steven P. Reise,et al.  The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures , 2007, Quality of Life Research.

[14]  E. Muraki,et al.  Full-Information Item Factor Analysis , 1988 .

[15]  R. D. Bock,et al.  Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm , 1981 .

[16]  R. D. Bock,et al.  Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters , 1982 .

[17]  Donald Hedeker,et al.  Full-information item bi-factor analysis , 1992 .

[18]  D. Kupfer,et al.  Background and rationale for the sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression (STAR*D) study. , 2003, The Psychiatric clinics of North America.

[19]  B. Muthén Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations , 1989 .