ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2010
Psychiatric caseness is a marker of major depressive episode in general practice.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Categorical and dimensional perspectives on depression in elderly primary care patients - Results of the AgeMooDe study.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2018Article
- The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care.Clinical epidemiology · 2017Article
- Factors affecting the presence of depression, anxiety disorders, and suicidal ideation in patients attending primary health care service in Lithuania.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2014Article
- The influence of symptoms of anxiety and depression on medication nonadherence and its causes: a population based survey of prescription drug users in Sweden.Patient preference and adherence · 2013Article
- Case-finding and risk-group screening for depression in primary care.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2011Article
- Using patient-centred consultation when screening for depression in elderly patients: a comparative pilot study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2011Article
- Nonadherence to anti-HIV medication is associated with higher level of anxiety: Experience from a tertiary care hospital of Odisha.Indian journal of pharmacologyObservational
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveScreening for a major depressive episode (MDE) in high-risk groups of patients within the primary care setting has been suggested by several Central Health Organizations. The objective of this study was to investigate whether patients rated as "psychiatric cases" by their general practitioner (GP) were likely to suffer from MDE and therefore qualified for systematic diagnostic screening.
designCross-sectional survey of primary care patients assessed through depression screening questionnaires and GP consultations.
settingA total of 676 general practices in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Subjects. A total of 8879 unselected primary care patients.
main outcome measuressensitivity, specificity, and Youden Index of the GPs' diagnoses of depression and psychiatric caseness versus patients' MDE status.
resultsThe proportion of primary care patients receiving a false-positive diagnosis of depression by their GP ranged from 12.4% to 25.2% depending on country. The corresponding numbers for the false-negative diagnoses were 0.9-2.5% [corrected]. Among patients with MDE, GPs recognize the disease in 56-75% of cases. However, GPs recognize as many as 79-92% of patients with MDE as "psychiatric cases".
conclusionsThis report confirms that misclassifications of MDE are common in the primary care setting. In addition, it shows that psychiatric caseness is a valid marker for the presence of MDE in primary care patients. This relationship should be considered in future screening recommendations.
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.