ArticleBrain and behavior2025
Psychometric Evaluation of the Insomnia Severity Index in Chronic Disease Patients Using Three Complementary Approaches.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychometric Evaluation of the Insomnia Severity Index in Chronic Disease Patients Using Three Complementary Approaches.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInsomnia is highly prevalent among individuals with chronic diseases and often exacerbates disease progression while adversely impacting mental health and quality of life. However, validated tools to assess insomnia in this vulnerable population remain limited in emerging economies. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Bangla version of the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) among Bangladeshi adults with chronic diseases using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Rasch modeling, and network analysis.
methodsA face-to-face survey was conducted among adults with clinically diagnosed chronic illnesses. CFA was used to test one-, two-, and three-factor structures and gender-based measurement invariance. Rasch analysis examined item fit, reliability, and response category functioning. Network analysis estimated symptom interrelations, centrality, bridge metrics, and gender-based network invariance.
resultsThe two-factor model (Night Symptoms, Daytime Impact) provided the most favorable balance between statistical fit and theoretical coherence. Although the three-factor model yielded marginally better indices, its reliance on a single-indicator factor and high inter-factor correlations limited its interpretability. All items showed strong factor loadings and internal consistency. Measurement invariance was supported across gender. Rasch modeling confirmed item fit, category functioning, and reliability, though some items exhibited moderate gender-based DIF. Network analysis identified ISI_1 (difficulty falling asleep) and ISI_6 (noticeability of sleep problems) as central symptoms, while ISI_4 (satisfaction with sleep pattern) emerged as a key bridge symptom. Predictability was high, and network structure was invariant across gender.
conclusionThe ISI-Bangla demonstrates strong psychometric validity in a chronic disease population, supporting its use for clinical and research purposes in Bangladesh. Testing the alternative factor structures confirmed the robustness of the two-factor specification. The integration of CFA, Rasch, and network analysis provides a comprehensive validation framework.
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.