No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 August 2024
The nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) is the first choice for screening for depression in primary care and other medical settings. The PHQ-9 has been shown to be a reliable and valid measure of depression symptoms, but there is disagreement among researchers about the factor structure of this questionnaire. Recent systematic reviews have found four different factor models of the PHQ-9, with one- and two-factor models being the most common. This discrepancy may be due to linguistic, cultural and clinical differences between the populations studied. The factor structure of the Russian version of the PHQ-9 during the COVID-19 pandemic has not been examined in any study to date.
The aim of our study was to determine the factorial structure and internal consistency of the Russian version of the PHQ-9 in COVID-19 survivors.
Fourteen thousand 725 (female - 11479 (78.0%), age - 18-79 years (M - 47.09, SD - 12.70) participants completed an online survey including the PHQ-9 and an ad hoc questionnaire focusing on sociodemographic and COVID-related characteristics. McDonald’s omega coefficient was estimated to determine the internal consistency of the questionnaire. Exploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM) with weighted least squares mean and variance adjusted estimator and geomin rotation was performed in Mplus 7.
ESEM provided evidence for a three-factor structure of the PHQ-9, representing affective (items 2, 6, 9), anergic (items 1, 3) and somatic (items 3, 5, 7, 8) dimensions of depression. These factors fit the data well (CFI - 0.998; TLI - 0.994; RMSEA (95% CI) - 0.028 (0.024 - 0.032)), better than a single factor (CFI - 0. 955; TLI - 0. 940; RMSEA (95% CI) - 0.089 (0.087 - 0.092)) and two-factor (CFI - 0.985; TLI - 0.971; RMSEA (95% CI) - 0.062 (0.059 - 0.065)). The McDonald’s omega was 0.82.
Our study revealed a three-factor structure of the Russian version of the PHQ-9 in COVID-19 survivors. COVID-19. A high internal consistency of the Russian version of the instrument was confirmed.
None Declared
You have
Access
Open access
To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.