Journal
JOURNAL OF HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 3, Pages 557-567Publisher
SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1359105320963552
Keywords
anhedonia; depression; psychometrics; SHAPS scale; telemedicine
Categories
Funding
- Instituto de Salud Carlos III [PI16/01852]
- American Foundation for Suicide Prevention [LSRG-1-005-16]
- Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades [RTI2018-099655-B-I00, TEC2017-92552-EXP]
- Comunidad de Madrid [Y2018/TCS-4705]
- Convocatoria de ayudas para la contratacion de investigadores predoctorales e investigadores postdoctorales
- Fondo Social Europeo through Programa Operativo de Empleo Juvenil and Iniciativa de Empleo Juvenil (YEI) [PEJD-2018-PRE/SAL-8417]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This study aimed to investigate the equivalence between the traditional paper-and-pencil format and a digital version of the SHAPS. The results showed no significant differences between the two formats, indicating good levels of internal consistency.
The gold standard for measuring anhedonia is the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS). To date, there are no validated electronic versions of this questionnaire. We aim to study the equivalence between the traditional paper-and-pencil format and a digital version of the SHAPS. A group of 67 patients completed both SHAPS formats, and differences between formats were assessed. McNemar's test showed no significant differences between the two systems. The Kappa coefficient was over 40% for most items, and reliability was above 0.8, showing good to excellent levels of internal consistency. Thus, we have demonstrated a close equivalence between paper-and-pencil and electronic SHAPS.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available
Share Paper
