4.6 Article

Reliability and validity of 2 single-item measures of psychosocial stress

Journal

EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 17, Issue 4, Pages 398-403

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.ede.0000219721.89552.51

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R25 CA94880, R01 CA74846] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Practical limitations in epidemiologic research may necessitate use of only a few questions for assessing the complex phenomenon called stress. The objective of this study was to evaluate the measurement characteristics of 2 single-item measures on the amount of stress and the ability to handle stress. Methods: We selected 218 adults age 50 to 76 years living in western Washington state from a large prospective cohort study of lifestyle factors and cancer risk to evaluate the 3-month test-retest reliability and intermethod reliability of the stress questions. To assess the latter, we compared 2 single-item measures on stress with 3 more fully validated multi-item instruments on perceived stress, daily hassles, and life events, which assessed the same underlying constructs as the single-item measures. Results: The test-retest reliabilities for the single-item stress measures were good (kappa and intraclass correlations between 0.66 and 0.74). The intermethod reliabilities comparing the 2 single-item stress measures with 3 multi-item instruments were moderate (r = 0.31-0.46) and comparable to correlations observed among the 3 multi-item instruments (r = 0.25-0.47). Conclusions: The 2 single-item stress measures are reliable at measuring stress with validity similar to longer questionnaires. Single-item measures offer a practical instrument for assessing stress in large prospective epidemiologic studies that lack space for longer instruments.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available