ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2017
Psychometric properties of the dimensional anxiety scales for DSM-5 in a Brazilian community sample.
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The psychometric validity and reliability of the DSM-5 Severity Measure for Social Anxiety Disorder in a Turkish adult clinical population.Dusunen adam : Bakirkoy Ruh ve Sinir Hastaliklari Hastanesi yayin organi · 2026Article
- Adaptation and Validation of the DSM 5 Youth Anxiety Scale-Part I (YAM-5-I) in Colombian Adolescents.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Psychometric validation of the Specific Phobia Questionnaire in an Australian community sample.Australian journal of psychology · 2025Article
- Associations between neighborhood characteristics, mental health, and parenting among mothers with young children in Brazil: A cross-sectional study of women living in communities of social disadvantage and ethnic diversity.PLOS mental health · 2024Article
- Psychometric properties of the Generalised Anxiety Disorder Dimensional Scale in an Australian sample.PloS one · 2023Article
- Psychometric properties of the dimensional anxiety scales for DSM-5 in a Brazilian community sample.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The DSM-5 highlights the use of dimensional assessments of mental health as a supplement to categorical diagnoses. This study investigated the psychometric properties of the DSM-5 Dimensional Anxiety Scales in a Brazilian community sample. Dimensional scales for generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia, and specific phobia were administered to 930 adults aged 18 to 70, 64.2% female. Psychometric properties investigated were: unidimensionality; measurement invariance; internal consistency; composite reliability; test-retest reliability; convergent and divergent validity; category thresholds and item performance analyses. Analyses revealed unidimensionality for all scales except for specific phobia. Measurement invariance, high internal consistency and composite reliability, and convergent and divergent validity were demonstrated. Test-retest reliability was high for all scales but generalized anxiety disorder. Item-based analyses evidenced that none of the items were very easy to endorse and that the scales offered more information about subjects with high severity estimates of anxiety. The DSM-5 Dimensional Anxiety Scales are a valid and reliable alternative to assess anxiety symptomatology in community settings, although further evaluation is needed, especially for specific phobia. The scales seem to be more useful for characterizing dimensionality of symptoms for subclinical or clinical cases than for slight or mildly anxious subjects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.