CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 104Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsPsychometric Methodologies and TestingAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dimensionality of the Whiteley Index: Assessment of hypochondriasis in an Australian sample of primary care patients

Conradt, Matthias, Cavanagh, Michael, Franklin, John, Rief, Winfried·2006·Journal of Psychosomatic Research
DOI 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.07.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective The Whiteley Index (WI) is a widely used instrument for measuring hypochondriacal worries and beliefs. Several studies explored the structural validity of the WI obtaining contrary results concerning the number of factors as well as the item composition. The main aim of this study is to compare factor solutions from previous studies to draw conclusions about the most valid scale model of the WI for administration in primary care.Methods Weighted least squares (WLS) confirmatory factor analyses of the WI were conducted. The sample in study consisted of 1800 patients from primary care practices. Seven different models were compared, including single- and three-factor conceptualisations.Results A seven-item, single-factor model best described the data, while three-factor models were clearly inadequate.Conclusions Results support a one-dimensional conceptualisation of the WI and suggest a certain subscale of the WI, the WI-7, to constitute the most psychometrically sound scale for use as a screening instrument for hypochondriasis in primary care. In addition to psychometric considerations, the brevity and simplicity of the WI-7 also make it attractive as a screening tool in the context of primary care. A cutoff score of 2/3, calculated on the basis of general practitioners' diagnoses, yielded the best balance of sensitivity and specificity in the present study.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.07.003

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 104

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Conradt, M., Cavanagh, M., Franklin, J., & Rief, W.
Affiliations
  • Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Macquarie University (AU)
Corresponding author
Conradt, Matthias
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-02
Volume
60
Issue
2
Pages
137-143
ISSN
0022-3999 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.07.003
OpenAlex
W2165659936
Cited by
104
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Psychosomatic Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
Whiteley Index, health anxiety, factor structure, confirmatory factor analysis, primary care patients, screening tool, cut-off values, sensitivity and specificity, general practitioners
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anxiety, Australia, Family Practice, Female, Humans, Hypochondriasis, Interview, Psychological, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Personality Assessment, Personality Inventory, Primary Health Care, Psychometrics, Sick Role, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review