This page was translated automatically from Turkish. Read the original

Bu sayfa, 26. Dünya Psikiyatri Kongresi'nde sunulan çalışmanın yapay zekâ desteğiyle hazırlanmış Türkçe özetidir. Çalışmanın sahibi sunan yazarlardır; atıf için orijinal kaynağa başvurun.

EV1340

Translation and psychometric validation of the Arabic version of the Burden Assessment Scale-19 among caregivers of individuals with mental disorders in Oman

TRANSLATION AND PSYCHOMETRIC VALIDATION OF THE ARABIC VERSION OF THE BURDEN ASSESSMENT SCALE-19 (BAS-19) AMONG CAREGIVERS OF INDIVIDUALS WITH MENTAL DISORDERS IN OMAN.

The Arabic Burden Assessment Scale-19 demonstrated high reliability and evidence of content and construct validity, but its dimensional structure remained unclear.

The study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the Burden Assessment Scale-19 (BAS-19) into Arabic and evaluate its reliability and validity among caregivers of individuals with mental disorders. The translation process, based on ISPOR principles, consisted of forward translation by 4 bilingual translators, a reconciled version, back-translation by 2 blinded experts, review by 5 senior experts, and pilot testing with 8 caregivers. Arabic-speaking primary caregivers aged over 18 years were recruited from the psychiatric outpatient clinics of Sultan Qaboos University Hospital between September 2025 and February 2026 for this cross-sectional psychometric validation study; of 244 participants, adjusted total scores were available for 234 and complete data for 176, with the sample divided into 88 for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and 88 for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The mean age of the sample was 41.4 ± 10.2 years, 54.0% were women, and the mean duration of caregiving was 7.6 ± 6.9 years; assessments used the Arabic BAS-19, HADS, and WHOQOL-BREF. For structural validity, the KMO value was 0.937 and Bartlett’s chi-square (171) = 2101.35 (p < 0.001), and parallel analysis retained two factors (Factor 1: practical disruption/impact on daily life; Factor 2: emotional/interpersonal burden; inter-factor r = 0.591). In the CFA comparison, the single-factor (CFI 0.823, TLI 0.801, RMSEA 0.120, SRMR 0.129) and orthogonal five-factor (CFI 0.566) models showed poor fit, while the bifactor model provided the best relative fit (CFI 0.914, TLI 0.890, RMSEA 0.089, SRMR 0.130), although overall fit remained inadequate. Reliability estimates were Cronbach’s alpha 0.945, McDonald’s omega 0.945, and a two-week test–retest ICC (2,1) = 0.833 (95% CI 0.71–0.91; n = 42); for construct validity, correlations were +0.616 with HADS anxiety, +0.488 with HADS depression, -0.527 with WHOQOL physical health, -0.531 with psychological health, -0.399 with social relationships, and -0.574 with environment, supporting all prespecified hypotheses. For content validity, after 6 items were revised, the final expert review yielded 285/285 acceptable ratings and an S-CVI/Ave of 1.00; the authors noted that larger, independent Arabic-speaking samples are needed before subscale or bifactor scoring can be recommended.

Tüm WCP 2026 özetleri