Evaluating the procedural validity of the multilingual computer assisted self interview (MultiCASI) in a refugee population

Abstract

Multimedia-based administration of questionnaires, presenting items both in writing and spoken word, offers numerous potential benefits in transcultural psychiatry, such as improved comprehension of each question, ease of administration, prevention of missing or arbitrary responses, and obviating subsequent data entry. The concept has become known as “Computer-Assisted Self Interviewing” (CASI), and while preliminary results are promising, previous studies have not directly compared CASI to paper-and-pen administration in a large and representative sample of refugees. The aim of this study was to evaluate the procedural validity of multilingual CASI in comparison to paper-based-administration. The Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 anxiety and depression subscales were administered in both modalities with a total of N = 281 participants from sites in Australia, New Zealand, and Denmark. We evaluated potential deviations in both the raw item and scale scores in each modality, while psychometric properties of each subscale were compared for an Arabic-speaking subsample (n = 125). Results showed no significant differences between raw item- or scale score across the two modalities, nor between the level of construct validity. In conclusion, this study supports a wider adaptation of multilingual CASI in the context of transcultural psychiatry, both for purposes of screening and treatment evaluation.