The Working Alliance Inventory's Measurement Properties: A Systematic Review.

Paap, D; Karel, YHJM; Verhagen, AP; Dijkstra, PU; Geertzen, JHB; Pool, G

The Working Alliance Inventory's Measurement Properties: A Systematic Review.

Paap, D Karel, YHJM Verhagen, AP Dijkstra, PU Geertzen, JHB Pool, G

Permalink

Publisher:: Frontiers Media S.A.
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Frontiers in Psychology, 2022, 13, pp. 1-19
Issue Date:: 2022

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (793.7 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Paap, D
dc.contributor.author	Karel, YHJM
dc.contributor.author	Verhagen, AP
dc.contributor.author	Dijkstra, PU
dc.contributor.author	Geertzen, JHB
dc.contributor.author	Pool, G
dc.date.accessioned	2023-07-10T20:53:35Z
dc.date.available	2022-06-24
dc.date.available	2023-07-10T20:53:35Z
dc.date.issued	2022
dc.identifier.citation	Frontiers in Psychology, 2022, 13, pp. 1-19
dc.identifier.issn	1664-1078
dc.identifier.issn	1664-1078
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/171424
dc.description.abstract	UNLABELLED: Measurement properties of the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI) and its various translations and adaptations for specific target groups have been investigated for over 30 years. No systematic review analyzing studies on measurement properties of the WAI has been conducted to date. COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurements INstruments (COSMIN) were developed for conducting high-quality systematic reviews on measurement properties in a transparent and standardized way. Aim of this study was to systematically review studies on measurement properties of the WAI, and its adapted versions, within psychotherapy, and other healthcare contexts using COSMIN criteria. PsycINFO, Medline, and EMBASE were searched (1989-2021). In all phases of the review procedure, study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, rating of the quality of measurement properties, and rating of the quality of evidence for measurement properties, disagreement between reviewers was resolved by discussion. Results on validity, internal structure, reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness were analyzed. In total 66 studies were included. In most studies, evidence for measurement properties was according to COSMIN criteria, insufficient, lacking, or conflicting. Content validity was rated insufficient because neither patients nor healthcare professionals were involved in the development and validation process. Hence evidence for content validity of the WAI is unknown. Conflicting evidence was found for structural validity. Evidence for internal consistency could not be established. Limited evidence was found for inter-rater reliability and convergent validity. Conflicting evidence was also found for test-retest reliability and divergent validity. COSMIN criteria exposed persistent problems in validation studies of the WAI. These findings may indicate that measurement properties of the WAI are not up to current standards, or that COSMIN criteria may be less appropriate for assessing measurement properties of the WAI, or it could indicate both. The results of this systematic review suggest that WAI outcomes should be interpreted with caution and further research is needed regarding the content validity and hypotheses development. For the future, the theoretical framework underlying the measurement of the working alliance needs to be studied in psychotherapy and other health contexts, and tested in methodologically sound studies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42019051428.
dc.format	Electronic-eCollection
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	Frontiers Media S.A.
dc.relation.ispartof	Frontiers in Psychology
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.3389/fpsyg.2022.945294
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject	1701 Psychology, 1702 Cognitive Sciences
dc.subject.classification	32 Biomedical and clinical sciences
dc.subject.classification	52 Psychology
dc.title	The Working Alliance Inventory's Measurement Properties: A Systematic Review.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	13
utslib.location.activity	Switzerland
utslib.for	1701 Psychology
utslib.for	1702 Cognitive Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Graduate School of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Graduate School of Health/GSH.Physiotherapy
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
pubs.consider-herdc	false
dc.date.updated	2023-07-10T20:53:32Z
pubs.publication-status	Published online
pubs.volume	13

Abstract:

UNLABELLED: Measurement properties of the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI) and its various translations and adaptations for specific target groups have been investigated for over 30 years. No systematic review analyzing studies on measurement properties of the WAI has been conducted to date. COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurements INstruments (COSMIN) were developed for conducting high-quality systematic reviews on measurement properties in a transparent and standardized way. Aim of this study was to systematically review studies on measurement properties of the WAI, and its adapted versions, within psychotherapy, and other healthcare contexts using COSMIN criteria. PsycINFO, Medline, and EMBASE were searched (1989-2021). In all phases of the review procedure, study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, rating of the quality of measurement properties, and rating of the quality of evidence for measurement properties, disagreement between reviewers was resolved by discussion. Results on validity, internal structure, reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness were analyzed. In total 66 studies were included. In most studies, evidence for measurement properties was according to COSMIN criteria, insufficient, lacking, or conflicting. Content validity was rated insufficient because neither patients nor healthcare professionals were involved in the development and validation process. Hence evidence for content validity of the WAI is unknown. Conflicting evidence was found for structural validity. Evidence for internal consistency could not be established. Limited evidence was found for inter-rater reliability and convergent validity. Conflicting evidence was also found for test-retest reliability and divergent validity. COSMIN criteria exposed persistent problems in validation studies of the WAI. These findings may indicate that measurement properties of the WAI are not up to current standards, or that COSMIN criteria may be less appropriate for assessing measurement properties of the WAI, or it could indicate both. The results of this systematic review suggest that WAI outcomes should be interpreted with caution and further research is needed regarding the content validity and hypotheses development. For the future, the theoretical framework underlying the measurement of the working alliance needs to be studied in psychotherapy and other health contexts, and tested in methodologically sound studies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42019051428.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/171424