An investigation into the factor structure of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for People with Learning Disabilities.
Factor structure
HONOS-LD
Intellectual disability
Mokken analysis
Psychometric analysis
Journal
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR
ISSN: 1365-2788
Titre abrégé: J Intellect Disabil Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9206090
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2023
11 2023
Historique:
revised:
21
06
2023
received:
28
10
2022
accepted:
11
07
2023
medline:
6
10
2023
pubmed:
2
8
2023
entrez:
2
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for People with Learning Disabilities (HoNOS-LD) is one of the most used outcome measures in learning disability services in the United Kingdom. There is relatively little known of the psychometric properties of the scales. A data set of HoNOS-LD scales from 571 people with learning disabilities was randomly split into two halves. Exploratory Mokken analysis was applied to the first dataset, and confirmatory scale factor analysis was applied to the second dataset to test the fit of scale structures. Two-factor and three-factor solutions were explored in the Mokken analysis, with the three-factor option having somewhat better characteristics. One-factor, three-factor and seven-factor solutions were explored using confirmatory factor analysis; a three-factor solution with items 8, 16, 17 and 18 used separately offers the best characteristics. The HoNOS-LD is best conceptualised as consisting of three scales, accounting for 14 items that can be labelled as 'Cognitive and Physical Functioning', 'Behaviour and Mood Disturbances' and 'Functional Difficulties'.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for People with Learning Disabilities (HoNOS-LD) is one of the most used outcome measures in learning disability services in the United Kingdom. There is relatively little known of the psychometric properties of the scales.
METHOD
A data set of HoNOS-LD scales from 571 people with learning disabilities was randomly split into two halves. Exploratory Mokken analysis was applied to the first dataset, and confirmatory scale factor analysis was applied to the second dataset to test the fit of scale structures.
RESULTS
Two-factor and three-factor solutions were explored in the Mokken analysis, with the three-factor option having somewhat better characteristics. One-factor, three-factor and seven-factor solutions were explored using confirmatory factor analysis; a three-factor solution with items 8, 16, 17 and 18 used separately offers the best characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS
The HoNOS-LD is best conceptualised as consisting of three scales, accounting for 14 items that can be labelled as 'Cognitive and Physical Functioning', 'Behaviour and Mood Disturbances' and 'Functional Difficulties'.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1113-1123Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research published by MENCAP and International Association of the Scientific Study of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Bendermacher N. (2010) Beyond alpha: lower bounds for the reliability of tests. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods 9, 11-102.
Bentler P. M. (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin 107, 238-246.
Burns A., Beevor A., Lelliott P., Wing J., Blakey A., Orrell M. et al. (1999) Health of the nation outcome scales for elderly people (HoNOS 65+). The British Journal of Psychiatry 174, 424-427.
Cangur S. & Ercan I. (2015) Comparison of model fit indices used in structural equation modeling under multivariate normality. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods 14, 14-167.
Clifford A. & Kemp F. G. (2020) A pragmatic mixed-methods review of changing “case-complexity” of referrals to an intensive support service. Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities 14, 111-124.
Cronbach L. J. (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16, 297-334.
Delaffon V., Anwar Z., Noushad F., Ahmed A. & Brugha T. (2012) Use of health of the nation outcome scales in psychiatry. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 18, 173-179.
Dickens G., Sugarman P. & Walker L. (2007) HoNOS-secure: a reliable outcome measure for users of secure and forensic mental health services. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology 18, 507-514.
Eisinga R., Grotenhuis M. T. & Pelzer B. (2013) The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? International Journal of Public Health 58, 637-642.
Esteba-Castillo S., Torrents-Rodas D., García-Alba J., Ribas-Vidal N. & Novell-Alsina R. (2018) Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the health of the nation outcome scales for people with learning disabilities (HoNOS-LD). Revista de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental 11, 141-150.
Fleminger S. & Powell J. (1999) Evaluation of outcomes in brain injury rehabilitation. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 9, 225-230.
Gowers S. G., Harrington R. C., Whitton A., Lelliot P., Beevor A., Wing J. et al. (1999) Health of the nation outcome scales for children and adolescents (HoNOSCA): glossary for HoNOSCA score sheet. The British Journal of Psychiatry 174, 428-431.
Harris M. G., Sparti C., Scheurer R., Coombs T., Pirkis J., Ruud T. et al. (2018) Measurement properties of the health of the nation outcome scales (HoNOS) family of measures: protocol for a systematic review. BMJ Open 8, e021177.
Hemker B. T., Sijtsma K. & Molenaar I. W. (1995) Selection of unidimensional scales from a multidimensional item bank in the polytomous Mokken IRT model. Applied Psychological Measurement 19, 337-352.
Hillier B., Wright L., Strydom A. & Hassiotis A. (2010) Use of the HoNOS-LD in identifying domains of change. The Psychiatrist 34, 322-326.
Hooper D., Coughlan J. & Mullen M. R. (2008) Model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 6, 53-60.
Li C. H. (2016) Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods 48, 936-949.
Loevinger J. (1948) The technic of homogeneous tests compared with some aspects of “scale analysis” and factor analysis. Psychological Bulletin 45, 507-529.
Mokken R. J. (1971) A Theory and Procedure of Scale Analysis. De Gruyter, Berlin, Germany.
Muncer S., Bass M. & Dawkin M. (2016) Mokken analysis of the health of the nation outcome scales in acute inpatient and community samples. Australasian Psychiatry 24, 459-461.
Muncer S. J. & Speak B. (2016) Mokken scale analysis and confirmatory factor analysis of the health of the nation outcome scales. Personality and Individual Differences 94, 272-276.
NHS England (2017). Transforming care model service specifications: supporting implementation of the service models. Available at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/transforming-care-service-model-specification-january-2017/ (retrieved 26 August 2022).
Rosseel Y. (2012) lavaan: an R package for structural equation modelling. Journal of Statistical Software 48, 1-36.
Roy A., Matthews H., Clifford P., Fowler V. & Martin D. M. (2002) Health of the nation outcome scales for people with learning disabilities (HoNOS-LD). The British Journal of Psychiatry 180, 61-66.
Schumacker E. & Lomax G. (2016) A Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modelling, 4th edn. Routledge.
Sijtsma K. & Molenaar I. W. (2002) Introduction to nonparametric item response theory, vol. 5. Sage.
Skelly A. & D'Antonio M. L. (2008) Factor structure of the HoNOS-LD: Further evidence of its validity and use as a generic outcome measure. The British Psychological Society 6, 3-7.
Skelly A., McGeehan C. & Usher R. (2018) An open trial of psychodynamic psychotherapy for people with mild-moderate intellectual disabilities with waiting list and follow up control. Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities 12, 153-162.
Snijders T. (2008) Intermediate Social Statistics Lecture 6: Scale Construction. Available at: http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~snijders/ (retrieved 26 August 2022).
Tenneij N., Didden R., Veltkamp E. & Koot H. M. (2009) Reliability and validity of the HoNOS-LD and HoNOS in a sample of individuals with mild to borderline intellectual disability and severe emotional and behavior disorders. Journal of Mental Health Research in Intellectual Disabilities 2, 188-200.
Tucker L. R. & Lewis C. (1973) A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika 38, 1-10.
Turton R. (2020) An exploratory factor analysis of HONOS-LD scales. Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities 14, 33-44.
Van der Ark L. A. (2007) Mokken scale analysis in R. Journal of Statistical Software 20, 1-19.
Van der Linden W. J. & Hambleton R. K. (1997) Handbook of Item Response Theory. Taylor & Francis Group.
Van W. H. (2003) Mokken scale analysis: between the Guttman scale and parametric item response theory. Political Analysis 11, 139-163.
Watson R., Egberink I. J., Kirke L., Tendeiro J. N. & Doyle F. (2018) What are the minimal sample size requirements for Mokken scaling? An empirical example with the Warwick-Edinburgh mental well-being scale. Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine 6, 203-213.
Williams B., Speak B., Hay P. & Muncer S. J. (2014) An evaluation of the independence of the health of the nation outcome scales. Australasian Psychiatry 22, 473-475.
Wing J. K., Beevor A. S., Curtis R. H., Park S. G. B., Hadden J. & Burns A. (1998) Health of the nation outcome scales (HoNOS): research and development. The British Journal of Psychiatry 172, 11-18.
World Health Organization (1992) ICD-10: Alphabetical Index, vol. 3. World Health Organization.