Cited by 142Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The work and social adjustment scale: Reliability, sensitivity and value

Zahra, Daniel, Qureshi, Adam, Henley, William, Taylor, Rod, Quinn, Cath, Pooler, Jill, Hardy, Gillian, Newbold, Alexandra +1 more·2014·International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the psychometric properties of the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) as an outcome measure for the Improving Access to Psychological Therapy programme, assessing its value as an addition to the Patient Health (PHQ-9) and Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaires (GAD-7). Little research has investigated these properties to date. METHODS: Reliability and responsiveness to change were assessed using data from 4,835 patients. Principal components analysis was used to determine whether the WSAS measures a factor distinct from the PHQ-9 and GAD-7. RESULTS: The WSAS measures a distinct social functioning factor, has high internal reliability, and is sensitive to treatment effects. CONCLUSIONS: The WSAS, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 perform comparably on measures of reliability and sensitivity. The WSAS also measures a distinct social functioning component suggesting it has potential as an additional outcome measure.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/13651501.2014.894072

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zahra, D., Qureshi, A., Henley, W., Taylor, R., Quinn, C., Pooler, J., Hardy, G., Newbold, A., & Byng, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Plymouth (GB)
  • Edge Hill University (GB)
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
Corresponding author
Zahra, Daniel
Venue
International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice
Published
2014-03-16
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
131-138
ISSN
  • 1365-1501 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-1788
OpenAlex
W2152311889
Cited by
141
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3
FWCI
7.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
  • Edge Hill University Research Information Repository (Edge Hill University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
Work and Social Adjustment Scale, psychometric properties, reliability statistics, responsiveness to change, social functioning, PHQ-9, GAD-7, Improving Access to Psychological Therapies, outcome measures, depression, generalized anxiety disorder, factor structure
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Social Adjustment, Work, Young Adult, Patient Outcome Assessment

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