Abstract
Background: The new International Classification of Diseases came into effect in 2022 (ICD‐11; World Health Organization, 2022) and included updated descriptions and diagnostic rules for “Depressive Episode” and “Generalized Anxiety Disorder.” No self‐report measures align with these disorders so this study reports the development and initial validation of the “International Depression Questionnaire” (IDQ) and “International Anxiety Questionnaire” (IAQ).
Methods: Items were developed that aligned to the ICD‐11 descriptions and their performance was assessed using data from a community sample (N = 2058) that was representative of the United Kingdom adult population.
Results: Item response theory models indicated that the two scales were unidimensional, and the items performed well in terms of difficulty and discrimination. Estimates of internal reliability were high. Based on ICD‐11 derived diagnostic algorithms, 7.4% met requirements for ICD‐11 Depressive Episode and 7.1% for Generalized Anxiety Disorder.
Conclusions: The IDQ and the IAQ are short, easy to use, self‐report measures aligned to the new and updated ICD‐11 diagnostic descriptions. This study provides initial evidence that the scales produce scores that are reliable and valid.
Methods: Items were developed that aligned to the ICD‐11 descriptions and their performance was assessed using data from a community sample (N = 2058) that was representative of the United Kingdom adult population.
Results: Item response theory models indicated that the two scales were unidimensional, and the items performed well in terms of difficulty and discrimination. Estimates of internal reliability were high. Based on ICD‐11 derived diagnostic algorithms, 7.4% met requirements for ICD‐11 Depressive Episode and 7.1% for Generalized Anxiety Disorder.
Conclusions: The IDQ and the IAQ are short, easy to use, self‐report measures aligned to the new and updated ICD‐11 diagnostic descriptions. This study provides initial evidence that the scales produce scores that are reliable and valid.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 854-870 |
Number of pages | 17 |
Journal | Journal of Clinical Psychology |
Volume | 79 |
Issue number | 3 |
Early online date | 10 Oct 2022 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published (in print/issue) - 10 Oct 2022 |
Bibliographical note
Funding informationEconomic and Social Research Council
Funding Information:
The initial stages of this project were supported by start‐up funds from the University of Sheffield (Department of Psychology, the Sheffield Methods Institute and the Higher Education Innovation Fund via an Impact Acceleration grant administered by the university) and by the Faculty of Life and Health Sciences at Ulster University. The research was subsequently supported by UK Research and Innovation/Economic and Social Research Council funding (grant ref. ES/V004379/1) and awarded to R. P. B, T. K. H, M. S, O. McB.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Psychology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Funding Information:
The initial stages of this project were supported by start‐up funds from the University of Sheffield (Department of Psychology, the Sheffield Methods Institute and the Higher Education Innovation Fund via an Impact Acceleration grant administered by the university) and by the Faculty of Life and Health Sciences at Ulster University. The research was subsequently supported by UK Research and Innovation/Economic and Social Research Council funding (grant ref. ES/V004379/1) and awarded to R. P. B, T. K. H, M. S, O. McB.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Psychology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Psychology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Keywords
- anxiety
- depression
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
- Clinical Psychology