ArticleJournal of pain and symptom management2013
Longitudinal comparison of three depression measures in adult cancer patients.
Article in Journal of pain and symptom management, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Depression, Anxiety, and Stress in Adults With Cancer: A Stratified Subgroup Meta-Analysis.Psycho-oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Operating characteristics of PROMIS four-item depression and anxiety scales in primary care patients with chronic pain.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2014Trial
- Feasibility study of an interactive multimedia electronic problem solving treatment program for depression: a preliminary uncontrolled trial.Behavior therapy · 2014Trial
- Trial
- Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale: Initial Validation in Three Clinical Trials.Psychosomatic medicineTrial
- Trauma exposure correlates among patients receiving care in federally qualified health centers.Journal of traumatic stress · 2024Article
- Comparable Minimally Important Differences and Responsiveness of Brief Pain Inventory and PEG Pain Scales across 6 Trials.The journal of pain · 2024Article
- Knowledge about Treatment (KaT) in Mental Health Services.Measurement and evaluation in counseling and development : the official publication of the Association for Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development · 2023Article
- Study protocol for a randomized trial of bridge: Person-centered collaborative care for serious mental illness and cancer.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Article
- Depression and Long-Term Prescription Opioid Use and Opioid Use Disorder: Implications for Pain Management in Cancer.Current treatment options in oncology · 2022Review
- Quality of life following concurrent temozolomide-based chemoradiation therapy or observation in low-grade glioma.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2022Article
- Responsiveness of PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) Depression Scales in three clinical trials.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2021Article
- Minimally important differences and severity thresholds are estimated for the PROMIS depression scales from three randomized clinical trials.Journal of affective disorders · 2020Article
- Bridge: Person-Centered Collaborative Care for Patients with Serious Mental Illness and Cancer.The oncologist · 2019Article
- Assessment of depression severity with the PHQ-9 in cancer patients and in the general population.BMC psychiatry · 2016Article
- Psychopathological profile and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cirrhosis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
contextAlthough a number of depression measures have been used with cancer patients, longitudinal comparisons of several measures in the same patient population have been infrequently reported.
objectivesTo compare the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 20-item depression scale, Short-Form 36 Mental Health Inventory five-item distress scale, and Patient Health Questionnaire nine-item depression scale in adults with cancer.
methodsOf the 309 cancer patients enrolled in a telecare management trial for depression, 247 completed the three depression measures at both baseline and at three months and a retrospective assessment of global rating of change in depression at three months. Internal consistency and construct validity of each measure were evaluated. Responsiveness was compared by calculating standardized response means and receiver operating characteristic area under the curve, using global rating of change as the external comparator measure. Differences between intervention and control groups in depression change scores were compared by calculating standardized effect sizes (SESs).
resultsInternal reliability coefficients for the three measures were ≥0.77 at baseline and ≥0.84 at three months. Construct validity was supported with strong correlations of the depression measures among themselves, moderately strong correlations with other measures of mental health, and moderate correlations with vitality and disability. In terms of responsiveness, standardized response means for all measures significantly differentiated between three groups (improved, unchanged, and worse) as classified by patient-reported global rating of change in depression at three months. The three measures were able to detect a modest treatment effect in the intervention group compared with the control group (SES ranging from 0.21 to 0.43) in the full sample, whereas detecting a greater treatment effect in depressed participants with comorbid pain (SES ranging from 0.30 to 0.58). Finally, the three measures performed similarly in detecting patients with improvement.
conclusionThe Hopkins Symptom Checklist 20-item depression scale, Mental Health Inventory five-item distress scale, and Patient Health Questionnaire nine-item depression scale were established as reliable, valid, and responsive depression measures in adults with cancer. Given the current recommendations for measurement-based care, our study shows that clinicians treating depressed cancer patients have several measures from which to choose.
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.