Search

Background: The University of California, San Diego Brief Assessment of Capacity to Consent (UBACC) is a tool to assess the capacity of participants to consent in psychiatric research. However, little is known about the psychometric properties in low and middle-income countries. This study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the UBACC. Methods: We examined the reliability, latent factor structure, and item response of the first attempt of the UBACC items in a sample of 32,208 adults (16,467 individuals with psychosis and 15,741 controls) in Ethiopia, Kenya, South Africa, and Uganda; exploring these properties in the full sample and stratified by country, diagnostic status, sex, and ethnolinguistic language groups. Results: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) suggested a two-factor model for the overall sample. However, a three-factor model was more appropriate when examining the latent structure across country, language, and sex. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) revealed an adequately fitting three-factor model for the full sample and across country, sex, and language. A two-factor model, however, was more appropriate for English and Amharic languages. Across all groups, the internal consistency of the UBACC was low, indicating below-threshold reliability (Cronbach's α (95 % CI = 0.58 (0.57–0.59). Using a multidimensional item-response theory framework for the full sample revealed that UBACC item 8, measuring understanding of the benefits of study participation, was the most discriminating item. Many of the other items had below-threshold discriminating characteristics. Conclusion: EFA and CFA converged towards a two and three-dimensional structure for the UBACC, in line with the developers of the original scale. The differences in properties between populations and language groups, low internal consistency, and below-threshold item functioning suggest that investigations into the cultural and linguistic nuances are still warranted. Understanding the utility of consent tools, such as the UBACC, in underrepresented populations will be a part of the larger process which ensures that research participants are adequately protected.

The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) has been widely used to screen psychological distress across many countries. However, its performance has not been extensively studied in Africa. The present study sought to evaluate and compare measurement properties of the K10 across four African countries: Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, and South Africa. Our hypothesis is that the measure will show equivalence across all.Data are drawn from a neuropsychiatric genetic study among adult participants (N = 9179) from general medical settings in Ethiopia (n = 1928), Kenya (n = 2556), Uganda (n = 2104), and South Africa (n = 2591). A unidimensional model with correlated errors was tested for equivalence across study countries using confirmatory factor analyses and the alignment optimization method. Results displayed 30 % noninvariance (i.e., variation) for both intercepts and factor loadings across all countries. Monte Carlo simulations showed a correlation of 0.998, a good replication of population values, indicating minimal noninvariance, or variation. Items “so nervous,” “lack of energy/effortful tasks,” and “tired” were consistently equivalent for intercepts and factor loadings, respectively. However, items “depressed” and “so depressed” consistently differed across study countries (R2 = 0) for intercepts and factor loadings for both items.The K10 scale likely functions equivalently across the four countries for most items, except “depressed” and “so depressed.” Differences in K10 items were more common in Kenya and Ethiopia, suggesting cultural context may influence the interpretation of some items and the potential need for cultural adaptations in these countries.