↓ Skip to main content

Confirmatory factor analysis of Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-OM) used as a measure of emotional distress in people with tinnitus

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Confirmatory factor analysis of Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-OM) used as a measure of emotional distress in people with tinnitus
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12955-016-0524-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. Handscomb, D. A. Hall, D. J. Hoare, G. W. Shorter

Abstract

People with troublesome tinnitus often experience emotional distress. Therefore a psychometrically sound instrument which can evaluate levels of distress and change over time is necessary to understand this experience. Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-OM) is a measure of emotional distress which has been widely used in mental health research. Although originally designed as a 4-factor questionnaire, factor analyses have not supported this structure and a number of alternative factor structures have been proposed in different samples. The aims of this study were to test the factor structure of the CORE-OM using a large representative tinnitus sample and to use it to investigate levels of emotional distress amongst people with a range of tinnitus experience. The CORE-OM was completed by 342 people experiencing tinnitus who self-rated their tinnitus on a 5-point scale from 'not a problem' to 'a very big problem'. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test all ten factor models which have been previously derived across a range of population samples. Model fit was assessed using fit criterion and theoretical considerations. Mean scores on the full questionnaire and its subscales were compared between tinnitus problem categories using one-way ANOVA. The best fitting model included 33 of the 34 original items and was divided into three factors: negatively worded items, positively worded items and risk. The full questionnaire and each factor were found to have good internal consistency and factor loadings were high. There was a statistically significant difference in total CORE-OM scores across the five tinnitus problem categories. However there was no significant difference between those who rated their tinnitus 'not a problem', and 'a small problem' or 'a moderate problem.' This study found a 3-factor structure for the CORE-OM to be a good fit for a tinnitus population. It also found evidence of a relationship between emotional distress as measured by CORE-OM and perception of tinnitus as a problem. Its use in tinnitus clinics is to be recommended, particularly when emotional distress is a target of therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ecuador 1 2%
Unknown 45 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 22%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 12 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 13 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,877,308
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#789
of 2,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,053
of 334,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#7
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,695 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.