↓ Skip to main content

Adaptation and Latent Structure of the Swahili Version of Beck Depression Inventory-II in a Low Literacy Population in the Context of HIV

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Adaptation and Latent Structure of the Swahili Version of Beck Depression Inventory-II in a Low Literacy Population in the Context of HIV
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0151030
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amina Abubakar, Raphael Birya Kalu, Khamis Katana, Beatrice Kabunda, Amin S. Hassan, Charles R. Newton, Fons Van de Vijver

Abstract

We set out to adapt the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)-II in Kenya and examine its factorial structure. In the first phase we carried out in-depth interviews involving 29 adult members of the community to elicit their understanding of depression and identify aspects of the BDI-II that required adaptation. In the second phase, a modified version of BDI-II was administered to 221 adults randomly selected from the community to allow for the evaluation of its psychometric properties. In the third phase of the study we evaluated the discriminative validity of BDI-11 by comparing a randomly chosen community sample (n = 29) with caregivers of adolescents affected by HIV (n = 77). A considerable overlap between the BDI symptoms and those generated in the interviews was observed. Relevant idioms and symptoms such as 'thinking too much' and 'Kuchoka moyo (having a tired heart)' were identified. The administration of the BDI had to be modified to make it suitable for the low literacy levels of our participants. Fit indices for several models (one factorial, two-factor model and a three factor model) were all within acceptable range. Evidence indicated that while multidimensional models could be fitted, the strong correlations between the factors implied that a single factor model may be the best suited solution (alpha [0.89], and a significant correlation with locally identified items [r = 0.51]) confirmed the good psychometric properties of the adapted BDI-II. No evidence was found to support the hypothesis that somatization was more prevalent. Lastly, caregivers of HIV affected adolescents had significantly higher scores compared to adults randomly selected from the community F(1, 121) = 23.31, p < .001 indicating the discriminative validity of the adapted BDI = II. With an adapted administration procedure, the BDI-II provides an adequate measure of depressive symptoms which can be used alongside other measures for proper diagnosis in a low literacy population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 111 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Postgraduate 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 22 20%
Unknown 34 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Unspecified 5 5%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 40 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 July 2017.
All research outputs
#6,390,691
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#77,217
of 195,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,030
of 339,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,698
of 4,713 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195,157 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 339,345 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,713 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.