↓ Skip to main content

The psychometric characteristics of the revised depression attitude questionnaire (R-DAQ) in Pakistani medical practitioners: a cross-sectional study of doctors in Lahore

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
The psychometric characteristics of the revised depression attitude questionnaire (R-DAQ) in Pakistani medical practitioners: a cross-sectional study of doctors in Lahore
Published in
BMC Research Notes, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-2652-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Haddad, Ahmed Waqas, Ahmed Bashir Sukhera, Asad Zaman Tarar

Abstract

Depression is common mental health problem and leading contributor to the global burden of disease. The attitudes and beliefs of the public and of health professionals influence social acceptance and affect the esteem and help-seeking of people experiencing mental health problems. The attitudes of clinicians are particularly relevant to their role in accurately recognising and providing appropriate support and management of depression. This study examines the characteristics of the revised depression attitude questionnaire (R-DAQ) with doctors working in healthcare settings in Lahore, Pakistan. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2015 using the revised depression attitude questionnaire (R-DAQ). A convenience sample of 700 medical practitioners based in six hospitals in Lahore was approached to participate in the survey. The R-DAQ structure was examined using Parallel Analysis from polychoric correlations. Unweighted least squares analysis (ULSA) was used for factor extraction. Model fit was estimated using goodness-of-fit indices and the root mean square of standardized residuals (RMSR), and internal consistency reliability for the overall scale and subscales was assessed using reliability estimates based on Mislevy and Bock (BILOG 3 Item analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models. Mooresville: Scientific Software, 55) and the McDonald's Omega statistic. Findings using this approach were compared with principal axis factor analysis based on Pearson correlation matrix. 601 (86%) of the doctors approached consented to participate in the study. Exploratory factor analysis of R-DAQ scale responses demonstrated the same 3-factor structure as in the UK development study, though analyses indicated removal of 7 of the 22 items because of weak loading or poor model fit. The 3 factor solution accounted for 49.8% of the common variance. Scale reliability and internal consistency were adequate: total scale standardised alpha was 0.694; subscale reliability for professional confidence was 0.732, therapeutic optimism/pessimism was 0.638, and generalist perspective was 0.769. The R-DAQ was developed with a predominantly UK-based sample of health professionals. This study indicates that this scale functions adequately and provides a valid measure of depression attitudes for medical practitioners in Pakistan, with the same factor structure as in the scale development sample. However, optimal scale function necessitated removal of several items, with a 15-item scale enabling the most parsimonious factor solution for this population.

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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 11 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Psychology 5 11%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 13 28%
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 18 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,298,613
of 22,994,508 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#956
of 4,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,495
of 317,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#36
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,994,508 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 317,332 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.