1. An Evaluation of Item Harmonization Strategies Between Assessment Tools of Psychopathology in Children and Adolescents.
- Author
-
Hoffmann MS, Moore TM, Axelrud LK, Tottenham N, Pan PM, Miguel EC, Rohde LA, Milham MP, Satterthwaite TD, and Salum GA
- Subjects
- Child, Female, Humans, Adolescent, Male, Reproducibility of Results, Psychometrics, Mental Health, Surveys and Questionnaires, Psychopathology, Mental Disorders diagnosis, Mental Disorders psychology
- Abstract
Data aggregation in mental health is complicated by using different questionnaires, and little is known about the impact of item harmonization strategies on measurement precision. Therefore, we aimed to assess the impact of various item harmonization strategies for a target and proxy questionnaire using correlated and bifactor models. Data were obtained from the Brazilian High-Risk Study for Mental Conditions (BHRCS) and the Healthy Brain Network (HBN; N = 6,140, ages 5-22 years, 39.6% females). We tested six item-wise harmonization strategies and compared them based on several indices. The one-by-one (1:1) expert-based semantic item harmonization presented the best strategy as it was the only that resulted in scalar-invariant models for both samples and factor models. The between-questionnaires factor correlation, reliability, and factor score difference in using a proxy instead of a target measure improved little when all other harmonization strategies were compared with a completely at-random strategy. However, for bifactor models, between-questionnaire specific factor correlation increased from 0.05-0.19 (random item harmonization) to 0.43-0.60 (expert-based 1:1 semantic harmonization) in BHRCS and HBN samples, respectively. Therefore, item harmonization strategies are relevant for specific factors from bifactor models and had little impact on p -factors and first-order correlated factors when the child behavior checklist (CBCL) and strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) were harmonized., Competing Interests: Methodological DisclosureWe report our sample size presents enough power to detect differences in factor analysis, all data inclusions, all manipulations, and all measures in the study. Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Luis Augusto Rohde has received grant or research support from, served as a consultant to, and served on the speakers’ bureau of Aché, Bial, Medice, Novartis/Sandoz, Pfizer/Upjohn, and Shire/Takeda in the last 3 years. The ADHD and Juvenile Bipolar Disorder Outpatient Programs chaired by Dr Rohde have received unrestricted educational and research support from the following pharmaceutical companies in the last 3 years: Novartis/Sandoz and Shire/Takeda. Dr Rohde has received authorship royalties from Oxford Press and ArtMed.Other author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF