Gilang Fachri MAULANA, Novita Intan AROVAH

The Psychometric Evaluation of the Immune Status Questionnaire in Indonesia

Immunity is one of the key factors in Covid-19 transmission, thus, assessments of immune status are essential for evaluating transmission risks. This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the Immune Status Questionnaire (ISQ), a recently developed immune status measure, among Indonesian adults, during COVID-19 Pandemic. Online Indonesian translated version of the ISQ and the Short Form 12 (SF-12) for measuring health-related quality of life were completed by 296 Indonesian adults (58% female, mean age=45±19 years old). Out of those, 102 (34%) completed a second survey one week later for the test-retest reliability assessment. The internal consistency reliability was assessed in both surveys. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess the construct validity. Correlations among ISQ items and between ISQ with SF-12 component summary were computed to assess the instruments’ convergent and divergent validities. Acceptable internal consistency reliabilities for the ISQ were found in the first and second surveys (=0.87 and 0.82, respectively). Each ISQ item demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability, with intraclass correlations ranging from 0.70 to 0.88. A good fit of the data was found with a root mean square error of approximation of 0.069, after a model modification. Correlations among ISQ components and between ISQ with SF-12 components provided sufficient evidence for convergent validity of the scale while divergent validity was partially supported. The validity and reliability of the Indonesian translated version of the ISQ for use in Indonesian adults are sufficiently demonstrated. The algorithm for computing ISQ in Indonesian adults, however, warrants further investigation.

PDF

___

1. Global Change Data Lab. Statistics and research-coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) 2021 updated 21 May 2021. Available at: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus.
2. Indonesian Ministry of Health. The official media for emergence infection 2021. Available at: https://infeksiemerging.kemkes.go.id/dashbo ard/covid-19.
3. Syuhada K, Wibisono A, Hakim A, Addini F. Covid-19 risk data during lockdown-like policy in Indonesia. Data Brief 2021; 35: 1-9.
4. Anugerah AR, Muttaqin PS, Purnama DA. Effect of large-scale social restriction (PSBB) during COVID-19 on outdoor air quality: Evidence from five cities in DKI Jakarta Province, Indonesia. Environ. Res. 2021; 197: 111164.
5. Commodari E, La Rosa VL, Carnemolla G, Parisi J. The psychological impact of the lockdown on Italian university students during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic: psychological experiences, health risk perceptions, distance learning, and future perspectives. Mediterr. J. Clin. Psychol. 2021; 9: 1-19.
6. Ding Y, Xu J, Huang S, Li P, Lu C, Xie S. Risk perception and depression in public health crises: Evidence from the COVID-19 crisis in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020; 17: 1-17.
7. Syafarina I, Shabrina A, Latifah AL, Adytia D, editors. Evaluation of the social restriction and its effect to the COVID-19 spread in Indonesia. 2021 9th International Conference on Information and Communication Technology (ICoICT); 2021: IEEE.
8. Commodari E, La Rosa VL. Adolescents in quarantine during COVID-19 pandemic in Italy: perceived health risk, beliefs, psychological experiences and expectations for the future. Front. Psychol. 2020; 11: 1-11.
9. Commodari E, La Rosa VL, Coniglio MA. Health risk perceptions in the era of the new coronavirus: are the Italian people ready for a novel virus? A cross-sectional study on perceived personal and comparative susceptibility for infectious diseases. Public Health 2020; 187: 8-14.
10. Biviá-Roig G, La Rosa VL, Gómez-Tébar M, Serrano-Raya L, Amer-Cuenca JJ, Caruso S, Commodari E, Barrasa-Shaw A, Lisón JF. Analysis of the impact of the confinement resulting from COVID-19 on the lifestyle and psychological wellbeing of Spanish pregnant women: an Internet-based cross-sectional survey. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020; 17: 1-14.
11. Netea MG, Schlitzer A, Placek K, Joosten LA, Schultze JL. Innate and adaptive immune memory: an evolutionary continuum in the host’s response to pathogens. Cell Host Microbe 2019; 25: 13-26.
12. Calder PC. Immunological parameters: what do they mean? J. Nutr. 2007; 137: 773S-80S.
13. Kaplan MH, Hufford MM, Olson MR. The development and in vivo function of T helper 9 cells. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2015; 15: 295-307.
14. Yoshida H, Hunter CA. The immunobiology of interleukin-27. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 2015; 33: 417-43.
15. Zhen A, Rezek V, Youn C, Lam B, Chang N, Rick J, Carrillo M, Martin H, Kasparian S, Syed P. Targeting type I interferon–mediated activation restores immune function in chronic HIV infection. J. Clin. Investig. 2017; 127: 260-8.
16. Wilod Versprille LJ, van de Loo AJ, Mackus M, Arnoldy L, Sulzer TA, Vermeulen SA, Abdulahad S, Huls H, Baars T, Scholey A. Development and validation of the Immune Status Questionnaire (ISQ). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019; 16: 4743.
17. van de Loo AJ, Kerssemakers N, Scholey A, Garssen J, Kraneveld AD, Verster JC. Perceived immune fitness, individual strength and hangover severity. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020; 17: 4039.
18. Reed P, Vile R, Osborne LA, Romano M, Truzoli R. Problematic internet usage and immune function. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0134538.
19. Peter H-H, Goldacker S, Haraldseide J, Großmann K, Gross W, Warnatz K, Grimbacher B, Rusch S, Nieters A, Vach W. Construction and clinical validation of a questionnaire-based risk score to identify patients suffering from immunodeficiency or systemic autoimmunity. J. Adv. Med 2014: 4751-69.
20. Andreasson A, Wicksell RK, Lodin K, Karshikoff B, Axelsson J, Lekander M. A global measure of sickness behaviour: Development of the Sickness Questionnaire. J. Health Psychol. 2018; 23: 1452-63.
21. Kiani P, Merlo A, Saeed HM, Benson S, Bruce G, Hoorn R, Kraneveld AD, van de Loo AJ, Severeijns NR, Sips AS. Immune fitness and the psychosocial and health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in the Netherlands: Methodology and design of the CLOFIT study. Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2021; 11: 199-218.
22. Verster JC, Anogeianaki A, Kruisselbrink D, Alford C, Stock A-K. Relationship between alcohol hangover and physical endurance performance: Walking the Samaria Gorge. J. Clin. Med. 2020; 9: 114.
23. Alghamdi BS, Alatawi Y, Alshehri FS, Tayeb HO, Tarazi FI. Relationship Between Public Mental Health and Immune Status During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Data from Saudi Arabia. Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy 2021; 14: 1439.
24. Verster JC, Arnoldy L, van de Loo AJ, Benson S, Scholey A, Stock A-K. The impact of mood and subjective intoxication on hangover severity. J. Clin. Med. 2020; 9: 2462.
25. Pangesti MW, Fertilita S, Purnamasari S. The relationship between smoking behaviour with immune status in students in the Enginering Department in Sriwijaya University: Sriwijaya University; 2021.
26. Lailfasha F, Larasti V, Fertilita S. The relationship of sleep disturbance with immune status in students in the Faculty of Medicine Sriwijaya University: Sriwijaya University; 2021.
27. Myers ND, Ahn S, Jin Y. Sample size and power estimates for a confirmatory factor analytic model in exercise and sport: A Monte Carlo approach. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 2011; 82: 412-23.
28. Jackson DL. Revisiting sample size and number of parameter estimates: Some support for the N: q hypothesis. Struct. Equ. Model. 2003; 10: 128-41.
29. Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross cultural health care research: a clear and user friendly guideline. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2011; 17: 268-74.
30. Ware Jr JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med. Care 1996: 220-33.
31. Arovah NI, Heesch KC. Verification of the reliability and validity of the short form 36 scale in Indonesian middle-aged and older adults. J Prev Med Public Health 2020; 53: 180-8.
32. Arovah NI, Heesch K. Assessment of the validity and reliability of the Indonesian version of Short Form 12 (SF-12). J. Prev. Med. Hyg. 2021; 62: E421-E9.
33. WHO Expert Consultation. Appropriate body-mass index for Asian populations and its implications for policy and intervention strategies. Lancet 2004; 363: 157-63.
34. Sharma B. A focus on reliability in developmental research through Cronbach’s Alpha among medical, dental and paramedical professionals. Asian Pac. J. Health Sci. 2016; 3: 271-8.
35. Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol. Assess. 1994; 6: 284.
36. Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK, Barlow EA, King J. Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. J. Educ. Res. 2006; 99: 323- 38.
37. MacCallum RC, Browne MW, Sugawara HM. Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychol. Methods 1996; 1: 130.
38. Hu Lt, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999; 6: 1-55.
39. Shevlin M, Miles JN. Effects of sample size, model specification and factor loadings on the GFI in confirmatory factor analysis. Pers. Individ. Dif. 1998; 25: 85-90.
40. Chan Y. Biostatistics 104: correlational analysis. Singapore Med. J. 2003; 44: 614-9.