ArticleJournal of affective disorders2021
Differential item functioning of the Beck Anxiety Inventory in a rural, multi-ethnic cohort.
Article in Journal of affective disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of the Chinese version of the resilience scale for the oldest-old.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Screening and Assessment for Psychological Distress among Burn Survivors.European burn journal · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEvaluating measurement bias is vital to ensure equivalent assessment across diverse groups. One approach for evaluating test bias, differential item functioning (DIF), assesses item-level bias across specified groups by comparing item-level responses between groups that have the same overall score. Previous DIF studies of the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) have only assessed bias across age, sex, and disease duration in monolingual samples. We expand this literature through DIF analysis of the BAI across age, sex, education, ethnicity, cognitive status, and test language.
methodsBAI data from a sample (n = 527, mean age=61.4 ± 12.7, mean education=10.9 ± 4.3, 69.3% female, 41.9% Hispanic/Latin American) from rural communities in West Texas, USA were analyzed. Item response theory (IRT) / logistic ordinal regression DIF was conducted across dichotomized demographic grouping factors. The Mann-Whitney U test and Hedge's g standardized mean differences were calculated before and after adjusting for the impact of DIF.
resultsSignificant DIF was demonstrated in 10/21 items. An adverse impact of DIF was not identified when demographics were assessed individually. Adverse DIF was identified for only one participant (1/527, 0.2%) when all demographics were aggregated. LIMITATIONS: These results might not be generalizable to a sample with broader racial representation, more severe cognitive impairment, and higher levels of anxiety.
conclusionsMinimal item-level bias was identified across demographic factors considered. These results support prior evidence that the BAI is valid for assessing anxiety across age and sex while contributing new evidence of its clinical relevance across education, ethnicity, cognitive status, and English/Spanish test language.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.