ÄÛBÑо¿Ôº

Mixed Population: (Zahra et al., 2014; n = 4,835; mean age = 41.62 (14.09) years; male = 36%)

• SEM (calculated) for entire group (n = 4,835): 3.89 points

Mixed Population: (Zahra et al., 2014)

• MCID for entire group (n = 4,835) = 8 points on the 0-40 scale

Chronic Insomnia: (Jansson-Frojmark, 2013; n = 73; mean age = 54.6 (11.7) years; female = 59%; mean duration of insomnia: 10.0 (5.4) years) 

• >17 points identifies subthreshold from moderate or severe clinical insomnia (88.2% sensitivity, 77.8% specificity)

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD): (Mundt et al., 2002; n = 197; mean time between assessments = 2 weeks)

• Acceptable test-retest reliability for total WSAS score: (ICC = 0.73)

Depression: (Mundt et al., 2002)

• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.807 at Baseline (n = 380)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.890 at Week 4 (n = 217)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.913 at Week 12 (n = 208)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.942 at Week 30 (n = 189)

OCD: (Mundt et al., 2002)

• Adequate: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.789 at Screening (n = 197)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.824 at Treatment Randomization (n = 190)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.847 at Week 2 (n = 174)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.863 at Week 6 (n = 164)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.882 at Week 10 (n = 150)

Personality Disorders: (Pedersen et al., 2017; n = 1,371; mean age = 34 (10) years; female = 1,038 (76%); data from 15 outpatient units within the Norwegian Network of Personality-Focused Treatment Programs)

• Adequate: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.79 at Baseline (n = 1,371)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.90 at Discharge (n = 1,371)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.83 for males (n = 333)
• Adequate: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.77 for females (n = 1,038)

Chronic Insomnia (Jansson-Frojmark, 2013) 

• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.91

Phobic Disorders: (Mataix-Cols, et al., 2005; n = 205 (73 agoraphobia, 62 social phobia, 70 specific phobia), mean age = 38 (12), female = 66%)

Self-ratings:

• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.82 at pretreatment (n = 205)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.87 at posttreatment (n = 153)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.90 at 1 month follow up (n = 123)

Blind assessor ratings:

• Adequate: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.72 at pretreatment (n = 147)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.80 at posttreatment (n = 106)
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.82 at 1 month follow up (n = 45)

Problem Gambling: (Tolchard, 2016; n = 171; mean age = 44 (15) years; female = 105 (61.5%))

• Excellent:  Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.83

Mixed Population: (Zahra et al., 2014)

• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.82 

Concurrent validity:

Depression: (Mundt et al., 2002)

• Significant difference in WSAS scores among participant groups stratified by scores on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) (¡Ü 7 = subclinical (n = 190), > 7 and < 18 = moderate (n = 382), and ¡Ý 18 = moderate to severe (n = 422) ( F = 438, df = 2,991, p < 0.001)
  • The corresponding WSAS scores for these categories were 6.5 (6.9), 15.5 (7.5), and 25.0 (7.6) 

OCD: (Mundt et al., 2002)

• Significant difference in WSAS scores among participant groups stratified by scores on the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) (¡Ü 10 = subclinical (n = 24), > 10 and < 16 = mild to moderate (n = 382), and ¡Ý 16 = moderate to severe (n = 783) ( F = 103, df = 2,872, p < 0.001)
  • The corresponding WSAS scores for these categories were 5.1 (4.0), 10.7 (6.4), and 20.6 (7.5) 

Chronic Insomnia (Jansson-Frojmark, 2013)

• Significant difference in WSAS scores across score groups of subthreshold (8-14 points, n = 11, mean WSAS score = 12.6 (6.9)), moderate (15-21 points, n = 38, mean WSAS score = 23.7 (7.8)), and severe (22-28 points, n = 24, mean WSAS score = 29.9 (3.4)) clinical insomnia on the Insomnia Severity Index (F = 21.93, p < .001

Personality Disorders (Pedersen, 2017)

• Large change: Significant decrease between mean scores on the WSAS from baseline to discharge within the PD sample (effect size d = 0.9)

Chronic Insomnia (Jansson-Frojmark, 2013)

Changes between pre- and post-treatment WSAS scores:  

• Significant reduction [t(16) = 6.02, p <.001] for Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) subsample I
• No significant change [t(14) = 1.27, p = 0.225] for wait-list control subsample I
• Significant reduction following behavior therapy for insomnia (BT-I) [t(10) = 3.43, p = 0.006] and BT-I plus constructive worry [t(9) = 4.35, p = 0.002] in CBT-I subsample II 
• Significant reduction [t(18) = 7.79, p < .001] for CBT-I subsample III

Phobic Disorders (Mataix-Cols, et al., 2005)

• Significant reduction of the WSAS total from pre- to post-treatment for the self-rated version using a 3x3 mixed-model MANOVA with phobia type as the between-groups factor and occasion as the within-groups factor (F = 117.6, df = 1154, p < 0.001)
• Significant further reduction from post-treatment to 1 month follow up (F = 16.5, df = 1122, p < 0.001), indicating the WSAS was highly sensitive to change and improved similarly in agoraphobics, social, and specific phobics.

Problem Gambling: (Tolchard, 2016)

• Significant improvement in disability score from initial assessment to discharge and to follow-up assessments at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months follow-up (p < .001)

Personality Disorders (Pedersen, 2017)

• Large change: Significant decrease between mean scores on the WSAS from baseline to discharge within the PD sample (effect size d = 0.9)

Chronic Insomnia (Jansson-Frojmark, 2013)

Changes between pre- and post-treatment WSAS scores:  

• Significant reduction [t(16) = 6.02, p <.001] for Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) subsample I
• No significant change [t(14) = 1.27, p = 0.225] for wait-list control subsample I
• Significant reduction following behavior therapy for insomnia (BT-I) [t(10) = 3.43, p = 0.006] and BT-I plus constructive worry [t(9) = 4.35, p = 0.002] in CBT-I subsample II 
• Significant reduction [t(18) = 7.79, p < .001] for CBT-I subsample III

Phobic Disorders (Mataix-Cols, et al., 2005)

• Significant reduction of the WSAS total from pre- to post-treatment for the self-rated version using a 3x3 mixed-model MANOVA with phobia type as the between-groups factor and occasion as the within-groups factor (F = 117.6, df = 1154, p < 0.001)
• Significant further reduction from post-treatment to 1 month follow up (F = 16.5, df = 1122, p < 0.001), indicating the WSAS was highly sensitive to change and improved similarly in agoraphobics, social, and specific phobics.

Problem Gambling: (Tolchard, 2016)

• Significant improvement in disability score from initial assessment to discharge and to follow-up assessments at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months follow-up (p < .001)

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (Cella et al., 2011; n = 1023 (Cohort 1: 639 patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) in the Pacing, graded Activity and Cognitive behavior therapy: a randomized Evaluation (PACE) trial, mean age = 38.3 (11.8) years; Cohort 2: 384 patients with CFS in a secondary care specialist clinic, mean age = 39.1 (10.1) years)  

• Adequate to Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.79 for cohort 1 and 0.89 for cohort 2 at initial assessment
• Excellent: Cronbach¡¯s ¦Á = 0.93 post-treatment and 0.94 at both 6 and 12 month follow-up for cohort 2
• Adequate to Excellent: Spearman-Brown split-half coefficient = 0.73 for cohort 1 and 0.85 for cohort 2 at initial assessment
• Excellent: Spearman-Brown split-half coefficient =  0.90 post-treatment, 0.93 at 6 months, and 0.94 at 12 months for cohort 2

Convergent validity:

Chronic Fatigue: (Cella, 2011; n = 639)

Correlations between the WSAS and other measures: 

• Adequate correlation with the Chalder Fatigue Scale (r = 0.329, p < 0.001)
• Poor correlation with the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale - Anxiety (r = 0.169, p < 0.001).
• Adequate correlation with the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale - Depression (r = 0.411, p < 0.001).
• Poor correlation with the Patient Health Questionnaire (r = 0.253, p < 0.001). 
• Poor correlation with the Jenkins Sleep Scale (r = 0.114, p < 0.001). 
• Poor correlation with the number of Center for Disease Control symptoms total (r = 0.183, p < 0.001).

Discriminant validity:

Chronic Fatigue: (Cella, 2011; n = 639)

• Adequate negative correlation with the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) (r = -0.381, p < 0.001)

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: (Cella et al., 2011, n=114)

• Statistically significant reduction in WSAS scores across four assessment points F(2.3,262.3) = 42.81, p < .0001, ¦Ç? = 0.28
• Statistically significant reduction in WSAS scores between initial and post-treatment F(1,113) = 41.4, p < .0001, ¦Ç? = 0.27
• Statistically significant reduction in WSAS scores between initial and post-treatment and first follow-up F(1,113) = 23.8, p < .0001, ¦Ç? = 0.17

Breast cancer, HIV, and Inflammatory diseases: (Thandi et al., 2017; n = 554; female = 72.5%; mean age = 48.3 years)

• Excellent: Cronbach's ¦Á = 0.93