Feasibility of generic, short, and easy-to-use assessment of psychological distress during psychotherapy: Longitudinal measurement invariance of CORE-10 and -OM

Objective: While the CORE-10 inventory for Clinical Outcome Routine Evaluation has shown good psychometric properties in cross-sectional assessment, the feasibility of generic, short, and easy-to-use longitudinal assessment of a broadband construct such as the targeted "general psychological di...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Psychotherapy research 2022-11, Vol.32 (8), p.1090-1099
Main Authors: Rosenström, Tom H., Mylläri, Sanna, Malkki, Veera, Saarni, Suoma E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Chi-square test
Clinical assessment
Clinical outcomes
core outcome routine evaluation
Cross-Sectional Studies
Feasibility
Feasibility Studies
Humans
Measurement
Mental Disorders - therapy
Psychological assessment
Psychological distress
Psychometrics
psychosocial intervention
Psychotherapy
psychotherapy registry
Quantitative psychology
Reproducibility of Results
Surveys and Questionnaires
Violations
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective: While the CORE-10 inventory for Clinical Outcome Routine Evaluation has shown good psychometric properties in cross-sectional assessment, the feasibility of generic, short, and easy-to-use longitudinal assessment of a broadband construct such as the targeted "general psychological distress" remains to be psychometrically demonstrated. Therefore, we investigated longitudinal measurement invariance (LMI) of CORE-10. For comprehensiveness, we also analyzed its parent inventory, CORE-OM. Method: We investigated the LMI of pre- and post-therapy CORE-10 and -OM assessments in a naturalistic treatment register of 1715 patients' short psychotherapies, testing whether the construct of "psychological distress" remained the same across the treatments. Results: We observed good psychometric properties and no violations of LMI for CORE-10 in chi-squared equivalence tests, nor in effect-size-based evaluations. Only the highly sensitive chi-squared difference tests detected LMI violations but these had little practical influence. The CORE-OM data did not fit well with factorial models but this was cross-sectional rather than a genuinely longitudinal (LMI-related) issue. Conclusions: CORE-10 appeared a structurally valid measure of general psychological distress and suitable for longitudinal assessment, whereas the CORE-OM had a less clear factorial structure. Regarding psychometrics, these findings support the use of CORE-10 in longitudinal assessment during psychotherapy and do not support CORE-OM.
ISSN:1050-3307
1468-4381
DOI:10.1080/10503307.2022.2074807