Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
INTRODUCTION
tress is a key concept in health research (1). Definitions
have basically focused on two major components of stress:
a) stressors in terms of environmental conditions, and b) the
persons reaction to stress. Stress reactions have been further
differentiated theoretically, for example, into perceptional
processing and emotional response. An empirical study based
on structural equation modeling techniques found that the
experience of stress was best represented by a two-factorial
construct of stress (2). Environmental conditions were one
factor; stress appraisal and emotional response in combination
comprised the second.
With regard to the measurement of stress, it has been much
debated whether or not we should limit ourselves to measuring
stressors in terms of objective conditions, such as major life
events or cumulative minor stressors (eg, daily hassles), or if
we should rather concentrate on the persons stress reactions,
in terms of their stress appraisal or emotional response (3).
Stress research has shown an inconsistent picture of the effects
of life events or daily hassles on health. Empirical studies have
shown many instances in which an experience of accumulated
From the Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Charite-University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Herbert Fliege,
Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Charite - University Hospital
Berlin, Luisenstrasse 13 a, D-10117 Berlin, Germany. E-mail: herbert.
fliege@charite.de
Received for publication December 1, 2003; revision received August 19,
2004.
Financial aid was granted by the Humboldt-University Medical Faculty
Research Fund (UFF-N. 99 648/99 652). The ethics committee approved
of the study design (N 209/98/107/99).
DOI: 10.1097/01.psy.0000151491.80178.78
78
0033-3174/05/6701-0078
Copyright 2005 by the American Psychosomatic Society
H. FLIEGE et al.
the resulting item-reduced version of the questionnaire with 20 items to
another sample (N 1808) to test for structural stability on a completely
separate set of data.
Samples
The study included two samples that involved a total of 2,458 participants.
1. The first sample (N 650) is composed of the following:
246 patients hospitalized in the Psychosomatic Medicine ward, that is,
patients with mental or behavioral disorders associated with at least one
complex of somatic complaints or illness (included are somatoform,
affective, eating disorders, other neurotic disorders, and personality
disorders, all according to ICD-10 F3 to F6; excluded are organic,
addictive, or psychotic disorders according to ICD-10 F0 to F2) (77.6%
female, 22.4% male; age 38.9 15.4 years, range 1779),
81 female patients after miscarriages of unexplained origin (age 30.2
7.7, range 17 41),
74 women after regular delivery (age 30.2 5.0, range 19 43), and
249 medical students in the 4th year (51.1% female, 48.9% male; age
24.6 2.9, range 20 41).
Initial results from this sample have been published in German (23).
2. The second sample (n 1808) is composed of the following:
559 Psychosomatic Medicine outpatients (diagnoses as above) (63.9%
female, 36.1% male; age 37.8 15.3, range 18 72),
184 outpatients with tinnitus (46.6% female, 53.4% male; age 42.1
12.7, range 28 70),
144 outpatients with inflammatory bowel diseases (54.7% female,
45.3% male; age 39.6 14.2, range 22 67),
587 women in routine care at week 8 of pregnancy (age 29.6 5.3,
range 17 44), and
334 healthy adults (61.6% female, 38.4% male; age 45.3 15.6, range
18 88) who were visitors to a well-frequented institution for public
education. (We defined only those participants as healthy who declared that they did not have any chronic or acute disease, were not in
constant medical treatment, and were not in permanent need of medication).
3. Sensitivity to change was tested in the following:
in 91 of the abovementioned sample of 246 Psychosomatic Medicine
inpatients who were treated 5 weeks or more, so that we could measure
at admission and after 5 weeks; treatment included a combination of
single and group psychotherapy, relaxation training, sports, and in
some cases antidepressants; and
in 46 tinnitus outpatients who were assessed before and after 10 weekly
sessions of progressive muscle relaxation training (27).
All patient groups were recruited in routine care. The students were
recruited at the end of a course. The healthy adults were recruited before or
at some time during the event that they visited. All participants were told
about the aims of the study and gave their informed consent to participate.
Instruments
Levenstein et al. (14) developed the PSQ to assess perceived stressful
situations and stress reactions on a mainly cognitive and to some degree
emotional level. With regard to stressors, the aim was to assess the subjective
experience of their quality as stressful.
The scale construction was based on classical test theory and was carried
out by factor analyses. The final instrument comprises 30 items that fell on
factor analysis into 7 scales (harassment, overload, irritability, lack of joy,
fatigue, worries, tension). Respondents rate how often an item applies to them
on a 4-point scale (1: almost never, 2: sometimes, 3: often, and 4: usually). The
general form of the instruction asks in general, in the last two years, the
recent form asks during the last month (both in (14)). The PSQ Index and
the scale values are mean values that are calculated from the raw item scores
and linearly transformed to values between 0 and 1. The instrument was
originally validated in English-speaking and Italian-speaking samples of
80
Statistical Procedures
Exploration
An exploratory principal component factor analysis of the 30-item questionnaire was performed on the data from the first sample using SPSS.
Because it could be expected that factors were correlated, an oblique rotation
(promax, power coefficient 4) was conducted. The factors were defined and
interpreted based on the factor pattern matrix. We also tested whether the
original 7-factor solution could be replicated on the German samples.
Item Reduction
The first rationale for item selection was to balance the explanatory power
between the scales by attaining scales of (approximately) equal length. The
second rationale was to maximize reliability of the resulting scales by selecting
those items that showed the highest corrected item-scale-correlation (Table 1).
Confirmation
We tested for structural stability on the data from the second sample,
where subjects were administered only those 20 items that had resulted from
the item selection. We tested a structure of 4 factors by means of linear
structural equation modeling (SEM, Program AmosTM 4.0), allowing for one
latent stress construct to underlie all 4 factors (Figure 1). In addition, we tested
a 3-factorial and a 2-factorial structure, also allowing for correlations between
the factors. We tested the 4-factorial structure for dimensional stability across
groups by multisample analyses (MSA) using SEM. We performed several
different comparisons between ill and healthy samples, combined and separate (Table 2). Because we expected mean values to differ across groups, we
added a mean structure to the MSA model. To examine whether the factors
can be defined the same way in all groups, cross-group equality constraints
were imposed on the factor loadings (one loading was fixed to 1 in all groups).
The mean of the factor was fixed to 0 in one group and estimated freely in the
other groups (one indicator intercept per factor was fixed to 1 in all groups).
Because this analysis did not aim to test hypotheses about means, no other
equality constraints across groups were imposed.
For purposes of the MSA, all factor loadings of the observed variables
(items) on latent traits (factors) and all loadings of the primary factors on the
superordinate factor (stress reaction) and the correlation between demands and stress reaction were assumed to be constant across groups.
Validation
To corroborate construct validity, we performed comparisons with a
measure of quality of life (WHOQOL-Bref (24)) and with a questionnaire of
chronic stress (TICS (21)) that had been applied in two partial samples.
To determine criterion validity, we tested for associations between stress
scores and immunological parameters in women suffering from a spontaneous
abortion (22). We took decidual tissue biopsies and determined the occurrence of
CD56-NK-cells, CD8- and CD3-T-cells, tryptase-mast cells (TMC) and
tumor necrosis factor-alpha-cells (TNF-) by immunohistochemistry (IHC).
All biopsies were fixed in 5% formalin and embedded in paraffin. We
Psychosomatic Medicine 67:78 88 (2005)
Exploratory Factor Analysis With Promax-Rotation of the Original 30 PSQ Items From Sample 1 (n 650)
Primary Components (all 30 items)
Items
No.
h2
I
Factor I: 41.6% explained variance (rotated solution)scale
worries
x
You are afraid for the future
22
x
You have many worries
18
x
Your problems seem to be piling up
15
You feel lonely or isolated
05
x
You fear you may not manage to attain
09
your goals
You find yourself in situations of conflict
06
You are under pressure from other people
19
You feel discouraged
20
You feel criticized or judged
24
x
You feel frustrated
12
You feel youre doing things because you
23
have to not because you want to
You feel loaded down with responsibility
28
You have too many decisions to make
11
Factor II: 8.0% explained variancescale tension
You feel tired
08
x
You feel tense
14
x
You feel rested
01
x
You feel mentally exhausted
26
x
You have trouble relaxing
27
x
You feel calm
10
You are irritable or grouchy
03
Factor III: 5.0% explained variancescale joy
x
You feel youre doing things you really like
07
x
You enjoy yourself
21
x
You are lighthearted
25
x
You are full of energy
13
x
You feel safe and protected
17
Factor IV: 3.4% explained variancescale demands
x
You have too many things to do
04
x
You have enough time for yourself
29
x
You feel under pressure from deadlines
30
x
You feel youre in a hurry
16
x
You feel that too many demands are being
02
made on you
Item parameters
(20 selected items)
Loadings
ri(ti)
II
III
IV
sd
.789
.766
.745
.710
.700
.028
.100
.136
.073
.138
.054
.028
.067
.210
.004
.200
.061
.083
.231
.115
.61
.63
.71
.55
.57
.69
.73
.77
.63
.69
2.08
2.23
2.10
1.01
0.98
0.96
.36
.41
.36
2.18
0.94
.39
.697
.689
.670
.620
.560
.528
.031
.258
.134
.368
.213
.185
.081
.124
.190
.287
.138
.378
.080
.285
.230
.197
.077
.139
.51
.59
.67
.50
.59
.55
.63
.64
.63
.56
.69
.64
1.97
0.89
.32
.505
.453
.132
.128
.058
.259
.341
.349
.59
.45
.63
.47
.168
.211
.231
.173
.246
.109
.175
.758
.691
.688
.589
.543
.501
.232
.067
.139
.309
.151
.047
.187
.169
.117
.047
.179
.012
.002
.150
.109
.55
.63
.66
.63
.56
.57
.28
.58
.68
.66
.68
.66
.67
.46
2.45
2.69
2.18
2.28
2.64
0.81
0.89
0.88
1.00
0.99
.48
.56
.39
.43
.55
.064
.201
.082
.001
.400
.003
.214
.191
.391
.097
.737
.597
.552
.538
.410
.069
.109
.022
.181
.022
.63
.70
.52
.59
.58
.61
.75
.64
.60
.63
2.31
2.34
2.71
2.63
2.35
0.89
0.87
0.95
0.90
1.04
.44
.45
.57
.54
.45
.185
.330
.084
.357
.360
.091
.015
.130
.161
.072
.042
.380
.197
.052
.038
.841
.792
.692
.455
.447
.66
.65
.57
.58
.54
.61
.51
.59
.58
.58
2.42
2.59
2.17
2.06
2.17
0.91
1.01
0.93
0.87
0.79
.47
.53
.39
.35
.39
h2 communality; M mean (before transformation); sd standard deviation; ri(ti) corrected item-scale correlation; p item difficulty.
Note: Remaining items are marked with an X.
examined two to four different sections of tissue for each patient. To make
sure the trophoblast had been in contact with maternal immunocompetent cells
and could have been a target of rejection, we stained the tissue with a monoclonal
antibody against pancytokeratin (CK) to test for invasive fetal cells. Consecutive
slides were stained with monoclonal antibody against mast cell tryptase, CD3,
CD8, or CD56, respectively. Probes for human TNF- mRNA were stored at
70C until use. Five-micron paraffin sections were dewaxed and rehydrated,
washed in DEPC-treated water, and immersed in 0.1N HCl followed by 2 SSC
at RT. Sections were exposed to 10 g/ml proteinase K and postfixed in 0.4%
paraformaldehyde at 4C. Hybridization was carried out at 59C using S35
UTP-labeled cRNA. Afterward, sections were washed in 4 SSC and treated
with RNase A (20 l/ml). The slides were desalted, dehydrated, air dried, dipped
into autoradiography emulsion, and developed. The sections were counterstained
with hemalaun. Microscopic investigators were blinded to the patients stress
scores. The number of positive cells per square millimeter tissue was evaluated by
two independent observers.
To examine sensitivity, we tested patient samples, pregnant women, and
Psychosomatic Medicine 67:78 88 (2005)
healthy adults for differences in their stress levels. All differences between
samples were investigated by analysis of variance and secured by post-hoc t tests.
RESULTS
Dimensional Structure
Exploration and Item Reduction
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of the quality of the
correlation matrix was high (KMO 0.96). A significant
Bartlett test of sphericity justified a dimension reducing procedure such as the factor analysis. The measure of sampling
adequacy was over 0.80, so the items could be considered apt
for factor analyses.
Exploratory analyses of all 30 items yielded a different
solution from the original one (14). A forced 7-factor solution
81
H. FLIEGE et al.
did not yield the original structure. Four factors were extracted
with eigenvalues greater than 1. The eigenvalues course was
12.5, 2.4, 1.5, and 1.0, then 0.9, 0.8, and 0.8, indicating a
strong primary factor with 1 to 3 additional factors. We tested
solutions with 4, 3 and 2 factors, respectively.
The 4-factor solution accounted for 58% of the variance.
TABLE 2.
Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFA) of 2-, 3-, and 4-Factorial Solutions and Multi-Sample Analyses (MSA) of the 4-Factorial Solution
of 20 PSQ Items From Sample 2 (n 1,808)
Fit Statisticsa
Model-test
Model
CFA
2 factors
3 factors
4 factors
MSA 3 groupsc
Restricted
Unrestricted
MSA 4 groupsd
Restricted
Unrestricted
MSA 5 groupse
Restricted
Unrestricted
df
Cmin/df
GFI
AGFI
RMR
TLI
CFI
RMSEA
2/df b
2,834.6
2,310.0
1,921.8
169
167
166
16.77
13.83
11.58
.83
.86
.89
.78
.83
.86
.007
.007
.006
.85
.87
.90
.86
.89
.91
.090
.087
.079
524.6/2
388.2/1
4,302.7
3,381.6
538
500
8.00
6.76
.92
.93
.93
.95
.064
.058
921.1/38
4,424.8
4,306.5
723
685
6.12
6.29
.92
.92
.93
.93
.055
.056
118.3/38
4,615.5
4,443.9
908
870
5.08
5.11
.92
.92
.93
.94
.049
.049
171.6/38
Fit statistics: GFI goodness of fit index; AGFI adjusted goodness of fit; RMR root mean squared residual; TFI Tucker-Lewis Index; CFI
comparative fit index; RMSEA root mean standard error of approximation.
b
2 df difference in chi-square by df (all p .001).
c
Ill (mental/behavioral, tinnitus, IBD) vs. pregnant vs. healthy.
d
Somatically ill (tinnitus, IBD) vs. mentally/behaviorally ill vs. pregnant vs. healthy.
e
Suffering from tinnitus vs. IBD vs. mental/behavioral illness vs. healthy vs. pregnant.
a
82
PSQ Scale Intercorrelations and Correlations Between PSQ and WHOQOL-Bref (n 650) and PSQ and TICS (Trier Inventory of
Chronic Stress) (n 559)
PSQ Scales
Worries
PSQ
Worries
Tension
Joy
Demands
WHOQOL-Bref
Physical domain
Psychological domain
Social domain
Environmental domain
Global QoL score
TICS
Work overload
Work discontent
Social stress
Lack of social recognition
Worries
Intrusive memories
Tension
Joy
Demands
Overall Score
.67
.61
.63
.51
.57
.36
.86
.87
.78
.76
.58
.78
.56
.60
.58
.64
.69
.50
.48
.56
.62
.79
.63
.55
.63
.24
.33
.25
.23
.17
.62
.79
.59
.57
.58
.61
.51
.52
.51
.80
.66
.61
.45
.39
.37
.67
.51
.44
.49
.32
.46
.61
.45
.83
.42
.45
.36
.55
.37
.77
.57
.52
.52
.81
.61
Notes: Joy values are positively coded (except for the overall score). All Pearson correlations p .001. WHOQOLs Cronbachs alpha: physical 0.81;
psychological 0.88; social 0.70; environmental 0.79; global QOL score 0.62. TICS Cronbachs alpha: work overload .88, work discontent .76, social stress .76,
lack of social recognition .85, worries .88, intrusive memories .91.
smaller than the sample size, any model would inevitably have
been rejected applying those indices. Thus, we followed a
recommendation to judge a model by a number of different
criteria (25). The root mean squared residual below 0.05 is a
criterion in favor of the model fit. Furthermore, the TuckerLewis index (TLI) and the comparative fit index (CFI)
reached good values (0.90). Both are independent of sample
size and either take into account model complexity (TLI) or
model misspecification (CFI). Finally, a value of about 0.08 or
less for the root mean standard error of approximation is
considered to indicate a reasonable fit (26). This index allows
for discrepancies between sample and population. Taking all
this into account, we consider the model fit satisfactory.
Only the path weight between item 29 and demands fails
to satisfy (0.47). This might be due to a positive item wording.
A tentative exclusion of the item does not result in a closer
model fit. The lowest path weight results for the overall
sample, whereas in the subgroups this weight varies between
0.54 and 0.60. Because this item had a high loading in the
original exploratory factor solution (0.72) and seems unproblematic as to content, we decided to keep it.
Multisample analyses yield that there is no appreciable gain
in model fit by omitting the restriction of structural equality
between groups. In sum, they confirm the assumption of a
comparable dimensional structure in different samples.
Reliability
Cronbachs alpha and split-half reliability values of the
scales in the subgroups are all at least 0.70, in half the cases
at least 0.80. Cronbachs alpha of the overall score is at least
0.85 and reliability at least 0.80 (Table 4).
83
H. FLIEGE et al.
TABLE 4.
Mean Values and Consistency Values in Different Subgroups of Sample 1 (n1 650) and Sample 2 (n2 1,808), noverall 2,458
PSQ Scales
Samples
Sample 1
Psychosomatic in-patients
M
SD
Crohnbachs alpha
r Spearman-Brown
Females after spontan. abortion
M
SD
Crohnbachs alpha
r Spearman-Brown
Females after regular delivery
M
SD
Crohnbachs alpha
r Spearman-Brown
Students
M
SD
Crohnbachs alpha
r Spearman-Brown
Sample 2
Psychosomatic out-patients
M
SD
Crohnbachs alpha
r Spearman-Brown
Tinnitus patients
M
SD
Crohnbachs alpha
r Spearman-Brown
IBD patients
M
SD
Crohnbachs alpha
r Spearman-Brown
Pregnant females 8th week
M
SD
Crohnbachs alpha
r Spearman-Brown
Healthy adults
M
SD
Crohnbachs alpha
r Spearman-Brown
ANOVA
df
F value
Explained variance 2
p
Overall
Worries
Tension
Joy
Demands
.53
.26
.83
.84
.48
.12
.80
.79
.37
.23
.83
.82
.44
.16
.79
.79
.52
.18
.85
.87
.34
.25
.83
.88
.44
.23
.83
.78
.56
.22
.75
.77
.41
.21
.79
.83
.41
.19
.92
.88
.23
.19
.79
.76
.36
.22
.82
.76
.65
.21
.77
.77
.38
.21
.77
.71
.33
.17
.91
.85
.26
.18
.77
.76
.40
.21
.83
.83
.60
.21
.82
.85
.43
.23
.81
.73
.37
.17
.92
.84
.60
.27
.86
.86
.66
.23
.81
.75
.37
.21
.77
.80
.47
.25
.82
.77
.59
.19
.92
.83
.41
.25
.89
.88
.54
.23
.84
.82
.47
.24
.87
.87
.44
.24
.81
.79
.48
.21
.94
.87
.35
.21
.79
.80
.47
.20
.77
.70
.51
.22
.79
.76
.40
.22
.82
.79
.43
.17
.90
.80
.23
.18
.81
.78
.37
.20
.79
.73
.64
.20
.76
.81
.37
.19
.76
.73
.33
.16
.90
.85
.26
.20
.83
.81
.34
.21
.81
.77
.62
.21
.79
.79
.36
.21
.80
.77
.33
.17
.92
.86
8;2,393
136.5
31%
.001
8;2,389
101.3
25%
.001
8;2,381
90.2
23%
.001
8;2,392
11.8
4%
.001
8;2,329
102.1
26%
.001
n 246
n 81
n 74
n 249
n 559
n 184
n 144
n 587
n 334
Note: Scale values are linearly transformed from 1 4 to 0 1. Joy is inverted when computing the overall PSQ score.
Construct Validity
Stress scales and overall score are negatively correlated,
and the joy scale is positively correlated with quality of life
(QoL) dimensions (p .001) (Table 3). All PSQ scales
84
Sociodemographic Variables
Sociodemographic differences were tested on the healthy
adults sample (n 334). All scales are significantly associated with age (worries r 0.14*, tension r 0.25**, joy
r 0.14**, demands r 0.31**, overall score r
0.28**), but not with gender. Figure 3 presents differences
H. FLIEGE et al.
DISCUSSION
The PSQ by Levenstein et al. (14) was revised and tested for
its dimensional structure on a large sample. We reduced the
length of the questionnaire from 30 to 20 items and explored a
meaningful and widely stable structure. The scales are balanced
in the sense of comprising of the same number of items. Reliability values and construct validity are satisfactory.
Exploratory analyses were performed on one sample, confirmatory analyses on a second and separate sample. The
original 7-factor solution was not replicated when the complete 30-item scale was analyzed. Instead, a 4-factor solution
emerges. SEM analyses confirm this structure. Multisample
Worries
Psychosomatic patients
Tinnitus
Inflammatory bowel dis.
Spontaneous abortion
Gravidity 8th week
Delivery
Students
Healthy adults
Tension
Psychosomatic patients
Tinnitus
Inflammatory bowel dis.
Spontaneous abortion
Gravidity 8th week
Delivery
Students
Healthy adults
Joy
Psychosomatic patients
Tinnitus
Inflammatory bowel dis.
Spontaneous abortion
Gravidity 8th week
Delivery
Students
Healthy adults
Demands
Psychosomatic patients
Tinnitus
Inflammatory bowel dis.
Spontaneous abortion
Gravidity 8th week
Delivery
Students
Healthy adults
Overall score
Psychosomatic patients
Tinnitus
Inflammatory bowel dis.
Spontaneous abortion
Gravidity 8th week
Delivery
Students
Healthy adults
p
t
i
a
g
d
s
h
p
t
i
a
g
d
s
h
p
t
i
a
g
d
s
h
p
t
i
a
g
d
s
h
p
t
i
a
g
d
s
h
H. FLIEGE et al.
that the original PSQ was specifically designed and developed to
ensure that men and women would have similar scores (14).
As to age, the original study yielded a relatively small
correlation between the overall score and age (r 0.22). In
the present study, the association with age is reversed (r
0.28). This might be due to the fact that among the former
sample, older age groups were underrepresented (mean age
was 32), whereas the sample of the present study covers all
age groups. Here, group differences suggest that the demands
values are slightly higher for the 30- to 39-year-olds compared
with the 20- to 29-year-olds. This would be in line with the
former findings. However, the overall stress score is appreciably lowest for the age groups above 60 years. Those groups
were hardly represented in the original study.
Reference values for healthy adults and different disease
groups were attained. We found particularly high stress levels
in Psychosomatic Medicine patients, followed by patients with
tinnitus and IBD and women after spontaneous abortion.
Women in pregnancy or after regular delivery and healthy
adults report the lowest stress levels. The data prove differential validity. Decreased levels of perceived stress after different forms of treatment in different settings sufficiently
substantiate sensitivity to change.
In sum, our revision of the PSQ arrived at an economic,
reliable, structurally stable and valid instrument that enables
us to assess perceived stress in healthy adults and different
disease groups. It measures three dimensions of a stress reaction (worries, tension, joy/reversed) and one stressor dimension. Because the stressors are generic, the questionnaire can
be administered to different clinical and healthy adult samples
in different settings. Results can be compared with the reference values at hand and across studies. The overall score is
comparable to results from earlier studies with the original
instrument (14,16). The original 30-item questionnaires
structure was not replicable, whereas the 20-item versions
structure proved reasonably robust. Taking this advantage and
respondent burden into account, we suggest that the 20-item
version is preferable. However, it means that notably the
social stressor domain is not sufficiently represented. Furthermore, future research should also investigate how a corresponding 20-item English version of the PSQ would perform.
We wish to thank Ingrid Wittmann, Urania Berlin, and Jan Schwendowius for their assistance in raising the healthy adult sample, and
especially Dr. Susan Levenstein for her many helpful comments on
the paper.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
REFERENCES
1. Kenny DT, Carlson JG, McGuigan FJ, Sheppard JL. Stress and health:
research and clinical applications. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic; 2000.
2. Lobel M, Dunkel-Schetter C. Conceptualizing stress to study effects on
health: environmental, perceptual, and emotional components. Anxiety
Res 1990;3:21330.
3. Cohen S, Kessler RC, Gordon GL. Strategies for measuring stress. In:
88
26.
27.