ArticlePloS one2020
Psychometric evaluation of the Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire (INQ) using item analysis according to the Rasch model.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increased belongingness as a mechanism of change of school-based programs mitigating suicidal ideation among adolescents.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Examining the Role of Item Sequencing of the Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire-15.Suicide & life-threatening behavior · 2026Article
- Negative social interpretation bias and suicidality: Indirect pathways through social anxiety and perceived burdensomeness.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Interpersonal Capitalization and Unmet Interpersonal Needs Among Adolescents at Varying Risk for Suicidal Ideation: A Daily Diary Study.Suicide & life-threatening behavior · 2026Article
- Relationship of Perceived Burdensomeness and Thwarted Belongingness to Suicide Ideation Persistence and Suicide Behavior Over 12 Months in People With Serious Mental Illness.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2026Article
- Understanding suicidal ideation-a network analysis of the Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire.PloS one · 2023Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire-15 in Spanish Adolescents.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Interpersonal Needs Questionnaire (INQ) assesses Thwarted Belongingness (TB) and Perceived Burdensomeness (PB), two predictors of suicidal thoughts. Up to now, the use of item response theory (IRT) for the evaluation of the INQ has been restricted to a single study with clinically depressed and suicidal youth. Therefore, the psychometric properties of the two INQ-15-subscales TB and PB were now evaluated in a general population sample (N = 2508) and a clinical adult population sample (N = 185) using IRT, specifically the Rasch model (RM) and the graphical log-linear Rasch model (GLLRM). Of special interest was whether the INQ-subscales displayed differential item functioning (DIF) across the two different samples and how well the subscales were targeted to the two sample populations. For the clinical sample, fit to a GLLRM could be established for the PB-subscale and fit to a RM was established for a five-item version of the TB-subscale. In contrast, for the general population sample fit to a GLLRM could only be achieved for the PB-subscale. Overall, there was strong evidence of local dependence (LD) across items and of some age- and gender-related DIF. Both subscales exhibited massive DIF related to the sample, indicating that they don't work the same across the general population and clinical sample. As expected, targeting of both INQ-subscales was much better for the clinical population. Further investigations of the INQ-15 under the Rasch approach in a large clinical population are recommended to determine and optimize the scale performance.
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.