Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25064739›Full record

ArticleEpilepsy & behavior : E&B2014

Validation of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for depression screening in adults with epilepsy.

Jaivir S Rathore, Lara E Jehi, Youran Fan, Sima I Patel, Nancy Foldvary-Schaefer, Maya J Ramirez, Robyn M Busch, Nancy A Obuchowski, George E Tesar

Open access · greenAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Epilepsy & behavior : E&B, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Modelling risk factors for depressive symptoms in seizure disorders.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Management of anhedonia after epilepsy surgery.Epilepsy & behavior reports · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jaivir S RathoreCleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Department of Neurology and Rehabilitation, Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of Illinois Medical Center at Chicago (UIC), IL, USA. Electronic address: neurocare9@gmail.com.
Lara E JehiCleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Neurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: JEHIL@ccf.org.
Youran FanNeurological Institute Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: FanY2@ccf.org.
Sima I PatelCleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; MINCEP Epilepsy Care, University of Minnesota Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Electronic address: sipatel12@gmail.com.
Nancy Foldvary-SchaeferCleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: foldvan@ccf.org.
Maya J RamirezNeurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Psychology Services, Tampa General Hospital, Tampa, FL, USA. Electronic address: maya.ramirez@gmail.com.
Robyn M BuschCleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: buschr@ccf.org.
Nancy A ObuchowskiDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: obuchon@ccf.org.
George E TesarCleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: TESARG@ccf.org.
Cleveland Clinic · USTampa General Hospital · USUniversity of Chicago Medical Center · US

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative of ClevelandKL2TR000440 · NCATS · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI KONSTAN, MICHAEL W. · 2012 to 2016
$11.1M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000440NCATS NIH HHS KL2TR000440
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to assess the accuracy and operating characteristics of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for depression screening in adults with epilepsy.

methodsTertiary epilepsy center patients served as the study population, with 237 agreeing to structured interview using the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), a "gold standard" instrument developed for rapid diagnosis of neuropsychiatric disorders, including major depressive disorder (MDD); 172 also completed the PHQ-9, and 127 completed both the PHQ-9 and the Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E) within two days of the MINI. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and areas under the ROC curves for each instrument were determined. Cut-points of 10 for the PHQ-9 and 15 for the NDDI-E were used, and ratings at or above the cut-points were considered screen-positive. The PHQ-9 was divided into cognitive/affective (PHQ-9/CA) and somatic (PHQ-9/S) subscales to determine comparative depression screening accuracy.

resultsThe calculated areas under the ROC curves for the PHQ-9 (n=172) and the PHQ-9/CA and PHQ-9/S subscales were 0.914, 0.924, and 0.846, respectively, with the PHQ-9 more accurate than the PHQ-9/S (p=0.002) but not different from the PHQ-9/CA (p=0.378). At cut-points of 10 and 15, respectively, the PHQ-9 had higher sensitivity (0.92 vs 0.87) but lower specificity (0.74 vs 0.89) compared with the NDDI-E. The areas under the ROC curves of the PHQ-9 and the NDDI-E showed similar accuracy (n=127; 0.930 vs 0.934; p=0.864). SIGNIFICANCE: The PHQ-9 is an efficient and nonproprietary depression screening instrument with excellent accuracy validated for use in adult patients with epilepsy as well as multiple other medical populations.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAdolescentAdultAgedCognition DisordersDepressionEpilepsyFemaleHumansInterview, PsychologicalMaleMiddle AgedMood DisordersNervous System DiseasesNeuropsychological TestsReference StandardsDepressionEpilepsy/seizuresMini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI)NDDI-EPHQ-9

Identifiers

PMID25064739
PMCPMC4427235
OpenAlexW2050877311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.