BACKGROUND: The Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) is a transdiagnostic measure that assesses severity and impairment associated with anxiety disorders. However, its psychometric properties were primarily examined in English-speaking or western countries. Therefore, this study aims to examine its psychometric parameters in the Czech Republic. METHODS: A large representative sample (n = 1738), a clinical sample (n = 57) and a retest sample (n = 20) were used. In addition to the OASIS, conventional measures of anxiety, depression, personality traits, self-esteem, life satisfaction, and other scales were also administered. Moreover, we examined the latent structure, reliability, validity, and the cut-off score for the Reliable Change Index (RCI) and the Clinically Significant Change Index (CSI). RESULTS: Higher anxiety was found in females, religious non-church members, and students. The Confirmatory Factor Analysis supported the adequate fit of the unidimensional solution: x2(4) = 3.20; p < 0.525; CFI = 1.000; TLI = 1.000;RMSEA = 0, SRMR = 0. The measurement equivalence examination indicated that the OASIS measures anxiety invariantly between males and females. The validity of the OASIS was supported by positive associations with neuroticism, depression, perceived stress, guilt, shame, and the established anxiety measures. The internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's alpha = 0.96, McDonald's omega = 0.96). The test-retest reliability was acceptable (r = 0.66). The cut-off for the CSI is 6 and the RCI is 5.32. CONCLUSIONS: The OASIS represents a reliable and valid instrument for assessing anxiety in adults. Due to its shortness, excellent psychometric properties, and percentile norms, it is especially useful for short and accurate screening of anxiety and mapping therapeutic changes in clinical practice.

Department of Community and Occupational Medicine University Medical Center Groningen University of Groningen Groningen the Netherlands

Faculty of Education Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica Banská Bystrica Slovak Republic

Olomouc University Social Health Institute Palacky University in Olomouc Univerzitni 244 22 771 11 Olomouc Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Bandelow B, Michaelis S. Epidemiology of anxiety disorders in the 21st century. Dialog Clin Neurosci. 2015;17:327–35. doi: 10.31887/DCNS.2015.17.3/bbandelow. PubMed DOI PMC

Simpson HB, Neria Y, Lewis-Fernández R, Schneier F. Anxiety disorders: Theory, research and clinical perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.

Formánek T, Kagström A, Cermakova P, Csémy L, Mladá K, Winkler P. Prevalence of mental disorders and associated disability: Results from the cross-sectional CZEch mental health Study (CZEMS) Eur Psychiatry. 2019;60:1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2019.05.001. PubMed DOI

Winkler P, Formanek T, Mlada K, Kagstrom A, Mohrova Z, Mohr P, et al. Increase in prevalence of current mental disorders in the context of COVID-19: analysis of repeated nationwide cross-sectional surveys. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences. 2020;29:e173. PubMed PMC

Winkler P, Mohrova Z, Mlada K, Kuklova M, Kagstrom A, Mohr P, et al. Prevalence of current mental disorders before and during the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of repeated nationwide cross-sectional surveys. J Psychiatr Res. 2021;139:167–71. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2021.05.032. PubMed DOI PMC

Andlin-Sobocki P, Wittchen H-U. Cost of anxiety disorders in Europe. Eur J Neurol. 2005;12(Suppl 1):39–44. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2005.01196.x. PubMed DOI

Stephens T, Joubert N. The economic burden of mental health problems in Canada. Chronic Dis Can. 2001;22:18–23. PubMed

Chisholm D, Sweeny K, Sheehan P, Rasmussen B, Smit F, Cuijpers P, et al. Scaling-up treatment of depression and anxiety: A global return on investment analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry. 2016;3:415–24. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(16)30024-4. PubMed DOI

Osma J, Quilez-Orden A, Suso-Ribera C, Peris-Baquero O, Norman SB, Bentley KH, et al. Psychometric properties and validation of the Spanish versions of the overall anxiety and depression severity and impairment scales. J Affect Disord. 2019;252:9–18. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2019.03.063. PubMed DOI

Brañas-Garza P, Kujal P, Lenkei B. Cognitive reflection test: Whom, how, when. J Behav Experimental Econ. 2019;82:101455. doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2019.101455. DOI

Ito M, Oe Y, Kato N, Nakajima S, Fujisato H, Miyamae M, et al. Validity and clinical interpretability of Overall Anxiety Severity And Impairment Scale (OASIS) J Affect Disord. 2015;170:217–24. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2014.08.045. PubMed DOI

Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JBW, Löwe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:1092–7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092. PubMed DOI

Beck AT, Epstein N, Brown G, Steer RA. An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: Psychometric properties. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1988;56:893–7. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.56.6.893. PubMed DOI

Spielberger CD. State-trait anxiety inventory for adults. 1983. 10.1037/t06496-000.

Campbell Sills L, Norman SB, Craske MG, Sullivan G, Lang AJ, Chavira DA, et al. Validation of a brief measure of anxiety-related severity and impairment: The Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) J Affect Disord. 2009;112:92–101. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2008.03.014. PubMed DOI PMC

Norman SB, Hami Cissell S, Means-Christensen AJ, Stein MB. Development and validation of an Overall Anxiety Severity And Impairment Scale (OASIS) Depress Anxiety. 2006;23:245–9. doi: 10.1002/da.20182. PubMed DOI

Hermans M, Korrelboom K, Visser S. A Dutch version of the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS): Psychometric properties and validation. J Affect Disord. 2015;172:127–32. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2014.09.033. PubMed DOI

Bragdon LB, Diefenbach GJ, Hannan S, Tolin DF. Psychometric properties of the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) among psychiatric outpatients. J Affect Disord. 2016;201:112–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2016.05.005. PubMed DOI

Norman SB, Allard CB, Trim RS, Thorp SR, Behrooznia M, Masino TT, et al. Psychometrics of the overall anxiety severity and impairment scale (OASIS) in a sample of women with and without trauma histories. Archives of Women’s Mental Health. 2013;16:123–9. doi: 10.1007/s00737-012-0325-8. PubMed DOI

WHO. Process of translation and adaptation of instruments. 2016.

Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The PHQ-9. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:606–13. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x. PubMed DOI PMC

Daňsová P, Masopustová Z, Hanáčková V, Kicková K, Korábová I. Metoda patient health questionnaire-9: Česká verze. [The patient health questionnaire-9: The czech version.] Československá Psychologie: Časopis Pro Psychologickou Teorii a Praxi. 2016;60:468–81.

Wang W, Bian Q, Zhao Y, Li X, Wang W, Du J, et al. Reliability and validity of the chinese version of the patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9) in the general population. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2014;36:539–44. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2014.05.021. PubMed DOI

Prikner O. Vybrané psychometrické charakteristiky škály GAD-7 [Diploma thesis]. 2021;85.

Bischoff T, Anderson SR, Heafner J, Tambling R. Establishment of a reliable change index for the GAD-7. Psychol Community Health. 2020;8:176–87. doi: 10.5964/pch.v8i1.309. DOI

Rosenberg M. Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1965.

Blatný M, Osecká L. Rosenbergova škála sebehodnocení: Struktura globálního vztahu k sobě. Československá psychologie. 1994;38:481–8.

Sinclair SJ, Blais MA, Gansler DA, Sandberg E, Bistis K, LoCicero A. Psychometric properties of the rosenberg self-esteem scale: Overall and across demographic groups living within the united states. Eval Health Prof. 2010;33:56–80. doi: 10.1177/0163278709356187. PubMed DOI

John OP, Srivastava S. The big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. New York: Guilford Press; 1999. pp. 102–38.

Hřebíčková M, Urbánek T. Big five. NEO pětifaktorový osobnostní inventář. 2001.

Fossati A, Borroni S, Marchione D, Maffei C. The big five inventory (BFI): Reliability and validity of its italian translation in three independent nonclinical samples. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2011;27:50. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000043. DOI

Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. Perceived stress scale. 1983. 10.1037/t02889-000. PubMed

Buršíková Brabcová D, Kohout J. Psychometrické ověření české verze Škály vnímaného stresu. E-psychologie. 2018;12:37–52. doi: 10.29364/epsy.311. DOI

Amaral AP, Soares MJ, Bos SC, Pereira AT, Marques M, Valente J, et al. The perceived stress scale (PSS-10)-a portuguese version. Clínica. 1991;12:187–93.

Maliňáková K, Černá A, Fürstová J, Čermák I, Trnka R, Tavel P. Psychometric analysis of the Guilt and Shame Experience Scale (GSES). Československá psychologie (Czechoslovak Psychology). 2019;63:177–92.

Neff KD. The Development and Validation of a Scale to Measure Self-Compassion. Self and Identity. 2003;2:223–50. doi: 10.1080/15298860309027. DOI

Benda J, Reichova A. Psychometric characteristics of the Czech version of the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS-CZ) Cesk Psychologie. 2016;60:120–36.

Garcia-Campayo J, Navarro-Gil M, Andrés E, Montero-Marin J, López-Artal L, Demarzo MMP. Validation of the spanish versions of the long (26 items) and short (12 items) forms of the self-compassion scale (SCS) Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:1–9. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-12-4. PubMed DOI PMC

Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW, Löwe B. The Patient Health Questionnaire Somatic, Anxiety, and Depressive Symptom Scales: a systematic review. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2010;32:345–59. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2010.03.006. PubMed DOI

Kocalevent R-D, Hinz A, Brähler E. Standardization of a screening instrument (PHQ-15) for somatization syndromes in the general population. BMC Psychiatry. 2013;13:91. PubMed PMC

Han C, Pae C-U, Patkar AA, Masand PS, Kim KW, Joe S-H, et al. Psychometric properties of the patient health questionnaire–15 (PHQ–15) for measuring the somatic symptoms of psychiatric outpatients. Psychosomatics. 2009;50:580–5. PubMed

Evans JM-C, Margison F, Barkham M, Audin K, Connell J, Graeme M. CORE: Clinical outcomes in routine evaluation. J Mental Health. 2000;9:247–55.

Seryjová Juhová D, Řiháček T, Cígler H, Dubovská E, Saic M, Černý M, et al. Česká adaptace dotazníku CORE-OM: vybrané psychometrické charakteristiky. 2018;62.

Elfström M, Evans C, Lundgren J, Johansson B, Hakeberg M, Carlsson S. Validation of the swedish version of the clinical outcomes in routine evaluation outcome measure (CORE-OM) Clin Psychol Psychother. 2013;20:447–55. PubMed

Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The satisfaction with life scale. J Pers Assess. 1985;49:71–5. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13. PubMed DOI

Diener E, Sandvik E, Pavot W. Happiness is the frequency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect. Elmsford: Pergamon Press; 1991. pp. 119–39.

Pavot W, Diener E, Colvin CR, Sandvik E. Further Validation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale: Evidence for the Cross-Method Convergence of Well-Being Measures. J Pers Assess. 1991;57:149–61. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5701_17. PubMed DOI

Lewis CA, Shevlin ME, Smékal V, Dorahy MJ. Factor structure and reliability of a Czech translation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale among Czech university students. Studia psychologica: časopis pre základný výskum v psychologických vedách. 1999.

Laranjeira CA. Preliminary validation study of the portuguese version of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychol health Med. 2009;14:220–6. doi: 10.1080/13548500802459900. PubMed DOI

Civelek EC. Essentials of structural equation modeling. 1 edition. Zea Books; 2018.

Hoe SL. Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation modelling technique. J Appl Quant Methods. 2008;3:76–83.

Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Res Methods. 2000;3:4–70. doi: 10.1177/109442810031002. DOI

Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen MR. Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. Electron J Bus Res Methods. 2008;6:53–9.

Jackson DL, Gillaspy JA, Jr, Purc-Stephenson R. Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychol Methods. 2009;14:6–23. doi: 10.1037/a0014694. PubMed DOI

Schermelleh Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Muller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research. 2003;8:23–74.

DiStefano C, Morgan GB. A comparison of diagonal weighted least squares robust estimation techniques for ordinal data. Struct Equ Model. 2014;21:425–38. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2014.915373. DOI

Jacobson NS, Truax P. Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1991;59:12–9. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.59.1.12. PubMed DOI

Wiger DE, Solberg KB. Tracking Mental Health Outcomes: A Therapist’s Guide to Measuring Client Progress, Analyzing Data, and Improving Your Practice. 1. edition. New York: Wiley; 2001.

Vargha A, Delan HD. A critique and improvement of the CL common language effect size statistics of McGraw and Wong. J Educational Behav Stat. 2000;25:101–32.

Gary S, Lenhard W, Lenhard A. Modelling norm scores with the cNORM package in r. Psych. 2021;3:501–21. doi: 10.3390/psych3030033. DOI

R Core Team . R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2021.

Rosseel Y. lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. J Stat Softw. 2012;48:1–36. doi: 10.18637/jss.v048.i02. DOI

Aust F, Barth M. papaja: Create APA manuscripts with R Markdown. 2020.

Revelle W, Psych . Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. Evanston: Northwestern University; 2021.

Peters G-J. Ufs: Quantitative analysis made accessible. 2021.

Sandora J, Novak L, Brnka R, van Dijk JP, Tavel P, Malinakova K. The abbreviated overall anxiety severity and impairment scale (OASIS) and the abbreviated overall depression severity and impairment scale (ODSIS): Psychometric properties and evaluation of the czech versions. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18:10337. doi: 10.3390/ijerph181910337. PubMed DOI PMC

Anniko M. Stuck on repeat: Adolescent stress and the role of repetitive negative thinking and cognitive avoidance. 2018.

González-Robles A, Mira A, Miguel C, Molinari G, Díaz-García A, García-Palacios A, et al. A brief online transdiagnostic measure: Psychometric properties of the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) among Spanish patients with emotional disorders. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0206516. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206516. PubMed DOI PMC

Osma J, Martínez-Loredo V, Díaz-García A, Quilez-Orden A, Peris-Baquero Ó. Spanish Adaptation of the Overall Anxiety and Depression Severity and Impairment Scales in University Students. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;19:345. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19010345. PubMed DOI PMC

Huang Y, Wang Y, Zeng L, Yang J, Song X, Rao W, et al. Prevalence and Correlation of Anxiety, Insomnia and Somatic Symptoms in a Chinese Population During the COVID-19 Epidemic. Front Psychiatry. 2020;11:568329. PubMed PMC

Gelenburg AJ. Psychiatric and somatic markers of anxiety. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2000;02:49–54. doi: 10.4088/PCC.v02n0204. PubMed DOI PMC

Hoge EA, Bui E, Marques L, Metcalf CA, Morris LK, Robinaugh DJ, et al. Randomized controlled trial of mindfulness meditation for generalized anxiety disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2013;74:786–92. doi: 10.4088/JCP.12m08083. PubMed DOI PMC

Greenberg J, Solomon S, Pyszczynski T, Rosenblatt A, Burling J, Lyon D, et al. Why do people need self-esteem? Converging evidence that self-esteem serves an anxiety-buffering function. J Personal Soc Psychol. 1992;63:913–22. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.913. PubMed DOI