ArticleAnnals of family medicine
Feasibility and diagnostic validity of the M-3 checklist: a brief, self-rated screen for depressive, bipolar, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorders in primary care.
Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening tools for ruling out mood and anxiety disorders in adults in primary care: a rapid systematic review.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- Screening tools assessing mental illness in primary care: A systematic review.The European journal of general practice · 2024Pooled it
- Mobile Apps for Bipolar Disorder: A Systematic Review of Features and Content Quality.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015Pooled it
- The prevalence of bipolar disorder in general primary care samples: a systematic review.General hospital psychiatryPooled it
- The Prevalence of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Primary Care: A Systematic Review.Harvard review of psychiatryPooled it
- A randomized controlled trial of an online support group addressing psychosexual distress among women treated for gynecologic cancer.Gynecologic oncology · 2025Trial
- Perinatal psychiatric symptoms and the continuum of breastfeeding in an urban university hospital population.AJOG global reports · 2026Article
- Fast, smart, and adaptive: using machine learning to optimize mental health assessment and monitor change over time.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Validating the efficacy and value proposition of mental fitness vocal biomarkers in a psychiatric population: prospective cohort study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- The Current State and Validity of Digital Assessment Tools for Psychiatry: Systematic Review.JMIR mental health · 2022Review
- A Smartphone-Based Self-management Intervention for Individuals With Bipolar Disorder (LiveWell): Empirical and Theoretical Framework, Intervention Design, and Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Telehealth adaptation of perinatal mental health mother-infant group programming for the COVID-19 pandemic.Infant mental health journal · 2022Article
- Assessment Tool of Bipolar Disorder for Primary Health Care: The SAEBD.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Brief Mental Health Disorder Screening Questionnaires and Use with Public Safety Personnel: A Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Implementing Measurement-Based Care for Depression: Practical Solutions for Psychiatrists and Primary Care Physicians.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2021Review
- Validation of the Recent Life Changes Questionnaire (RLCQ) for stress measurement among adults residing in urban communities in Pakistan.BMC psychology · 2019Observational
- Immediate Mood Scaler: Tracking Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety Using a Novel Mobile Mood Scale.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2017Article
- Using mHealth technologies to improve the identification of behavioral health problems in urban primary care settings.SAGE open medicine · 2017Article
- Behavioral health characteristics of a technology-enabled sample of Alzheimer's caregivers with high caregiver burden.mHealth · 2017Article
- Intimate partner violence screening and counseling in the health care setting: Perception of provider-based discussions as a strategic response to IPV.Health care for women international · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMood and anxiety disorders are the most common psychiatric conditions seen in primary care, yet they remain underdetected and undertreated. Screening tools can improve detection, but available instruments are limited by the number of disorders assessed. We wanted to assess the feasibility and diagnostic validity of the My Mood Monitor (M-3) checklist, a new, 1-page, patient-rated, 27-item tool developed to screen for multiple psychiatric disorders in primary care.
methodsWe enrolled a sample of 647 consecutive participants aged 18 years and older who were seeking primary care at an academic family medicine clinic between July 2007 and February 2008. We used a 2-step scoring procedure to make screening more efficient. The main outcomes measured were the sensitivity and specificity of the M-3 for major depression, bipolar disorder, any anxiety disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a specific type of anxiety disorder. Using a split sample technique, analysis proceeded from determination of optimal screening thresholds to assessment of the psychometric properties of the self-report instrument using the determined thresholds. We used the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview as the diagnostic standard. Feasibility was assessed with patient and physician exit questionnaires.
resultsThe depression module had a sensitivity of 0.84 and a specificity of 0.80. The bipolar module had a sensitivity of 0.88, and a specificity of 0.70. The anxiety module had a sensitivity of 0.82 and a specificity of 0.78, and the PTSD module had a sensitivity of 0.88 and a specificity of 0.76. As a screen for any psychiatric disorder, sensitivity was 0.83 and specificity was 0.76. Patients took less than 5 minutes to complete the M-3 in the waiting room, and less than 1% reported not having time to complete it. Eighty-three percent of clinicians reviewed the checklist in 30 or fewer seconds, and 80% thought it was helpful in reviewing patients' emotional health.
conclusionsThe M-3 demonstrates utility as a valid, efficient, and feasible tool for screening multiple common psychiatric illnesses, including bipolar disorder and PTSD, in primary care. Its diagnostic accuracy equals that of currently used single-disorder screens and has the additional benefit of being combined into a 1-page tool. The M-3 potentially can reduce missed psychiatric diagnoses and facilitate proper treatment of identified cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.