ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2026
Harmonising Depression and Anxiety Measures Across International Cohorts: A Framework Validated Using Measurement Invariance.
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsCross-national research on mental health trajectories requires harmonised measures that are valid and comparable. However, measurement scales often differ between cohorts in item content and cultural context. This study aimed to develop a framework for harmonising mental health measures across international cohorts, focussing on depression and anxiety symptoms.
methodsWe applied a structured, theory-driven approach to align item content across two longitudinal ageing cohorts that used different self-report instruments with heterogeneous item codings: ELSA-UK and ELSA-Brasil. Data were collected before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic, providing a natural experiment for examining temporal changes in mental health. The harmonisation process involved: (1) mapping items to DSM-5 symptom domains via expert review; (2) transforming response formats into harmonised ordinal indicators; (3) leveraging the Harmony AI tool to identify semantically equivalent items; and (4) testing measurement invariance across waves and cohorts using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA).
resultsScalar invariance was achieved for depression in both longitudinal and cross-cohort models, enabling meaningful latent mean comparisons between cohorts. For anxiety, scalar invariance was supported within but not across cohorts, likely due to the limited number of conceptually matching items.
conclusionThe proposed harmonisation framework demonstrates the feasibility of robust cross-cultural comparisons of mental health constructs. Its success depends on the conceptual alignment and quality of available items. This approach provides a methodological template for future harmonisation efforts in global health and psychiatric epidemiology.
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.