Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21785907›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2012

Validation of the PHQ-15 for somatoform disorder in the occupational health care setting.

Lars de Vroege, Rob Hoedeman, Jasper Nuyen, Klaas Sijtsma, Christina M van der Feltz-Cornelis

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2012. 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 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lars de VroegeTrimbos Institute, Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands. l.vroege@trimbos.nl
Rob Hoedeman
Jasper Nuyen
Klaas Sijtsma
Christina M van der Feltz-Cornelis
Trimbos Institute · NLTilburg University · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWithin the occupational health setting, somatoform disorders are a frequent cause of sick leave. Few validated screening questionnaires for these disorders are available. The aim of this study is to validate the PHQ-15 in this setting.

methodsIn a cross-sectional study of 236 sicklisted employees, we studied the performance of the PHQ-15 in comparison with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) as golden reference standard. We approached employees who were sick listed for a period longer than 6 weeks and shorter than 2 years for participation. This study was conducted on one location of a large occupation health service in the Netherlands, serving companies with more than 500 employees. All employees who returned the PHQ-15 were invited for the MINI interview. Specificity and sensitivity were calculated for optimal cut point and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) was constructed.

resultsA total of 107 participants consented to participate in the MINI interview. A non-response analysis showed no significant differences between groups. According to the MINI, the prevalence of somatoform disorders was 21.5%, and the most frequent found disorder was a pain disorder. The PHQ-15 had an optimal cut point of 9 (patients scoring 9 or higher (≥9) were most likely to suffer from a somatoform disorder), with specificity and sensitivity equal to 61.9 and 56.5%, respectively. ROCs showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.63.

conclusionThe PHQ-15 shows moderate sensitivity but limited efficiency with a cut point of 9 and can be a useful questionnaire in the occupational health setting.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInterview, PsychologicalMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNetherlandsOccupational HealthOccupational Health ServicesPrevalenceSensitivity and SpecificitySocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID21785907
PMCPMC3274689
OpenAlexW2068274060

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.