Resilience to affective disorders: A comparative validation of two resilience scales

Ruslan Leontjevas; Wendie Op de Beek; Johan Lataster; Nele Jacobs

doi:10.1016/j.jad.2014.07.010

Resilience to affective disorders: A comparative validation of two resilience scales

Ruslan Leontjevas^*, Wendie Op de Beek, Johan Lataster, Nele Jacobs

^*Corresponding author for this work

MHeNs - Neuroscience

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

23 Citations (Web of Science)

Abstract

Background: Resilience to affective disorders in rehabilitating patients or in individuals with a severe disability is of special research interest. However, there is no gold standard for measuring resilience. We aimed to test the accuracy of the Dutch translation of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRSal) and of the Resilience Scale (RSal) in recognizing rehabilitating patients without anxiety and depression, and to determine the reliability and construct validity of both scales. Methods: A within-subjects longitudinal study with six assessments, each one week apart. Forty residents of a nursing home rehabilitating unit were interviewed to assess resilience (BRSnl and RSal), optimism and pessimism (LOT-R), depression and anxiety (HADS), positive and negative affect (PANAS), and pain (VAS). Results: Receiver operating characteristic analyses for recognizing the absence of depression and anxiety (DADS score <7) revealed better accuracy (P=0.038) for the BRSnl (AUC=0.84; p

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	262-268
Journal	Journal of Affective Disorders
Volume	168
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2014.07.010
Publication status	Published - 15 Oct 2014

Keywords

Anxiety/anxiety disorders
Assessment/diagnosis
Depression
Rehabilitation
Resilience

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jad.2014.07.010

Cite this

@article{616b0a9f105249d89d29244d5aa59460,

title = "Resilience to affective disorders: A comparative validation of two resilience scales",

abstract = "Background: Resilience to affective disorders in rehabilitating patients or in individuals with a severe disability is of special research interest. However, there is no gold standard for measuring resilience. We aimed to test the accuracy of the Dutch translation of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRSal) and of the Resilience Scale (RSal) in recognizing rehabilitating patients without anxiety and depression, and to determine the reliability and construct validity of both scales. Methods: A within-subjects longitudinal study with six assessments, each one week apart. Forty residents of a nursing home rehabilitating unit were interviewed to assess resilience (BRSnl and RSal), optimism and pessimism (LOT-R), depression and anxiety (HADS), positive and negative affect (PANAS), and pain (VAS). Results: Receiver operating characteristic analyses for recognizing the absence of depression and anxiety (DADS score <7) revealed better accuracy (P=0.038) for the BRSnl (AUC=0.84; p ",

keywords = "Anxiety/anxiety disorders, Assessment/diagnosis, Depression, Rehabilitation, Resilience",

author = "Ruslan Leontjevas and {de Beek}, {Wendie Op} and Johan Lataster and Nele Jacobs",

year = "2014",

month = oct,

day = "15",

doi = "10.1016/j.jad.2014.07.010",

language = "English",

volume = "168",

pages = "262--268",

journal = "Journal of Affective Disorders",

issn = "0165-0327",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Resilience to affective disorders: A comparative validation of two resilience scales

AU - Leontjevas, Ruslan

AU - de Beek, Wendie Op

AU - Lataster, Johan

AU - Jacobs, Nele

PY - 2014/10/15

Y1 - 2014/10/15

N2 - Background: Resilience to affective disorders in rehabilitating patients or in individuals with a severe disability is of special research interest. However, there is no gold standard for measuring resilience. We aimed to test the accuracy of the Dutch translation of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRSal) and of the Resilience Scale (RSal) in recognizing rehabilitating patients without anxiety and depression, and to determine the reliability and construct validity of both scales. Methods: A within-subjects longitudinal study with six assessments, each one week apart. Forty residents of a nursing home rehabilitating unit were interviewed to assess resilience (BRSnl and RSal), optimism and pessimism (LOT-R), depression and anxiety (HADS), positive and negative affect (PANAS), and pain (VAS). Results: Receiver operating characteristic analyses for recognizing the absence of depression and anxiety (DADS score <7) revealed better accuracy (P=0.038) for the BRSnl (AUC=0.84; p

AB - Background: Resilience to affective disorders in rehabilitating patients or in individuals with a severe disability is of special research interest. However, there is no gold standard for measuring resilience. We aimed to test the accuracy of the Dutch translation of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRSal) and of the Resilience Scale (RSal) in recognizing rehabilitating patients without anxiety and depression, and to determine the reliability and construct validity of both scales. Methods: A within-subjects longitudinal study with six assessments, each one week apart. Forty residents of a nursing home rehabilitating unit were interviewed to assess resilience (BRSnl and RSal), optimism and pessimism (LOT-R), depression and anxiety (HADS), positive and negative affect (PANAS), and pain (VAS). Results: Receiver operating characteristic analyses for recognizing the absence of depression and anxiety (DADS score <7) revealed better accuracy (P=0.038) for the BRSnl (AUC=0.84; p

KW - Anxiety/anxiety disorders

KW - Assessment/diagnosis

KW - Depression

KW - Rehabilitation

KW - Resilience

U2 - 10.1016/j.jad.2014.07.010

DO - 10.1016/j.jad.2014.07.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 25069081

VL - 168

SP - 262

EP - 268

JO - Journal of Affective Disorders

JF - Journal of Affective Disorders

SN - 0165-0327

ER -