11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Metaanálisis de comparación de grupos y metaanálisis de generalización de la fiabilidad del cuestionario State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) Translated title: Meta-analysis of group comparison and meta-analysis of reliability generalization of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Questionnaire (STAI)

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Fundamentos: Desde su creación, el STAI se ha citado en más de 14.000 documentos, contando con más de 60 adaptaciones en diversos países. En algunas de ellas este cuestionario no cuenta con puntuaciones clínicas. El objetivo de este trabajo es determinar si el cuestionario State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) tiene puntuaciones superiores en personas diagnosticadas de ansiedad respecto a la población general. Además, se pretende analizar si la consistencia interna es adecuada en personas con ansiedad. Método: Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en Tripdatabase, Cochrane, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, PyscINFO y Scholar Google de documentos publicados entre 2008 y 2012. Se seleccionaron 131 artículos para la comparación entre pacientes diagnosticados de ansiedad respecto a la población general y 25 para la generalización de la fiabilidad. En los análisis se utilizó la d de Cohen para la comparación de medias (método de efectos aleatorios) y para la generalización de la fiabilidad el alfa de Cronbach (método de efectos fijos). Resultados: En la comparación entre grupos, en la ansiedad estado (d = 1,39; IC95%: 1,22-1,56) y en la ansiedad rasgo (d = 1,74; IC95%: 1,56-1,91) las diferencias fueron estadísticamente significativas. Además de ello, la fiabilidad para pacientes con algún trastorno de ansiedad abarcó de 0,87 a 0,93. Conclusiones: El STAI es un cuestionario sensible para medir el nivel de ansiedad y fiable en personas diagnosticadas de crisis de angustia, fobia específica, fobia social, fobia social generalizada, trastorno de ansiedad generalizada, trastorno de estrés post-traumático, trastorno obsesivo compulsivo o trastorno por estrés agudo.

          Translated abstract

          Background: Since its creation the STAI has been cited in more than 14,000 documents, with more than 60 adaptations in different countries. In some adaptations this instrument has no clinical scores. The aim of this work is to determine if the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) has higher scores in patients diagnosed with anxiety than in general population. In addition, we want to examine if the internal consistency is adequate in anxious patient samples. Methods: We performed a literature search in Tripdatabase, Cochrane, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, PyscINFO and Scholar Google, for documents published between 2008 y 2012. We selected 131 scientific articles to compare between patients diagnosed with anxiety and general population, and 25 for the generalization of reliability. For the analysis we used Cohen's d for means comparisons (random-effects method) and Cronbach's alpha for the reliability generalization (fixed-effects method). Results: In the groups comparision the differences in state anxiety (d=1.39; CI95%: 1.22-1.56) and in the trait anxiety (d=1.74; CI95%:1.56-1.91) were significants. The reliability for patients of some anxiety disorder was between 0.87 and 0.93. Conclusions: So it seems that the STAI is sensitive to the level of anxiety of the individual and reliable for patients with diagnosis of panic attack, specific phobia, social phobia, generalized social phobia, generalized anxiety disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder or acute Stress disorder.

          Related collections

          Most cited references64

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Twelve-month and lifetime prevalence and lifetime morbid risk of anxiety and mood disorders in the United States.

          Estimates of 12-month and lifetime prevalence and of lifetime morbid risk (LMR) of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) anxiety and mood disorders are presented based on US epidemiological surveys among people aged 13+. The presentation is designed for use in the upcoming DSM-5 manual to provide more coherent estimates than would otherwise be available. Prevalence estimates are presented for the age groups proposed by DSM-5 workgroups as the most useful to consider for policy planning purposes. The LMR/12-month prevalence estimates ranked by frequency are as follows: major depressive episode: 29.9%/8.6%; specific phobia: 18.4/12.1%; social phobia: 13.0/7.4%; post-traumatic stress disorder: 10.1/3.7%; generalized anxiety disorder: 9.0/2.0%; separation anxiety disorder: 8.7/1.2%; panic disorder: 6.8%/2.4%; bipolar disorder: 4.1/1.8%; agoraphobia: 3.7/1.7%; obsessive-compulsive disorder: 2.7/1.2. Four broad patterns of results are most noteworthy: first, that the most common (lifetime prevalence/morbid risk) lifetime anxiety-mood disorders in the United States are major depression (16.6/29.9%), specific phobia (15.6/18.4%), and social phobia (10.7/13.0%) and the least common are agoraphobia (2.5/3.7%) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (2.3/2.7%); second, that the anxiety-mood disorders with the earlier median ages-of-onset are phobias and separation anxiety disorder (ages 15-17) and those with the latest are panic disorder, major depression, and generalized anxiety disorder (ages 23-30); third, that LMR is considerably higher than lifetime prevalence for most anxiety-mood disorders, although the magnitude of this difference is much higher for disorders with later than earlier ages-of-onset; and fourth, that the ratio of 12-month to lifetime prevalence, roughly characterizing persistence, varies meaningfully in ways consistent with independent evidence about differential persistence of these disorders. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Use of mental health services for anxiety, mood, and substance disorders in 17 countries in the WHO world mental health surveys.

            Mental disorders are major causes of disability worldwide, including in the low-income and middle-income countries least able to bear such burdens. We describe mental health care in 17 countries participating in the WHO world mental health (WMH) survey initiative and examine unmet needs for treatment. Face-to-face household surveys were undertaken with 84,850 community adult respondents in low-income or middle-income (Colombia, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, China, South Africa, Ukraine) and high-income countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, USA). Prevalence and severity of mental disorders over 12 months, and mental health service use, were assessed with the WMH composite international diagnostic interview. Logistic regression analysis was used to study sociodemographic predictors of receiving any 12-month services. The number of respondents using any 12-month mental health services (57 [2%; Nigeria] to 1477 [18%; USA]) was generally lower in developing than in developed countries, and the proportion receiving services tended to correspond to countries' percentages of gross domestic product spent on health care. Although seriousness of disorder was related to service use, only five (11%; China) to 46 (61%; Belgium) of patients with severe disorders received any care in the previous year. General medical sectors were the largest sources of mental health services. For respondents initiating treatments, 152 (70%; Germany) to 129 (95%; Italy) received any follow-up care, and one (10%; Nigeria) to 113 (42%; France) received treatments meeting minimum standards for adequacy. Patients who were male, married, less-educated, and at the extremes of age or income were treated less. Unmet needs for mental health treatment are pervasive and especially concerning in less-developed countries. Alleviation of these unmet needs will require expansion and optimum allocation of treatment resources.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A guide for naming research studies in Psychology

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                resp
                Revista Española de Salud Pública
                Rev. Esp. Salud Publica
                Ministerio de Sanidad, Consumo y Bienestar social (Madrid, Madrid, Spain )
                1135-5727
                2173-9110
                February 2014
                : 88
                : 1
                : 101-112
                Affiliations
                [01] Granada orgnameUniversidad de Granada orgdiv1Departamento Personalidad, evaluación y tratamiento psicológico
                Article
                S1135-57272014000100007 S1135-5727(14)08800100007
                10.4321/S1135-57272014000100007
                24728394
                bce3dcc7-428b-4456-89c3-2faa248ca190

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 International License.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 27, Pages: 12
                Product

                SciELO Public Health


                Ansiedad,Metaanálisis,Fiabilidad,Anxiety,Meta-analysis,Reliability

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content259

                Cited by42

                Most referenced authors234