Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25281010›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2015

Validation of clinical symptom IRT scores for diagnosis and severity assessment of common mental disorders.

Elena Olariu, José-Ignacio Castro-Rodriguez, Pilar Álvarez, Carolina Garnier, Marta Reinoso, Luis Miguel Martín-López, Jordi Alonso, Carlos G Forero

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Change in functioning outcomes as a predictor of the course of depression: a 12-month longitudinal study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018
    Article
  2. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Elena OlariuUniversitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Department of Experimental and Health Sciences, Barcelona, Spain.
José-Ignacio Castro-Rodriguez
Pilar Álvarez
Carolina Garnier
Marta Reinoso
Luis Miguel Martín-López
Jordi Alonso
Carlos G Forero
Parc de Salut · ESPompeu Fabra University · ESCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública · ESHospital del Mar Research Institute · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe studied the validity and responsiveness of an item response theory (IRT) scoring method for assessing major depressive episode (MDE) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) severity based on direct assessment of DSM-IV-TR symptoms.

methodsProspective cohort study (baseline, 1-month, 3-months assessments) of patients seeking help for incident or aggravated mood or anxiety symptoms from primary, outpatient and inpatient mental health centers (N = 244; 67.81 % active cases - 100 % under psychiatric treatment). The drop-out rate at 3 months was 24.89 %. Patients were assessed at each follow-up for presence/absence of DSM-IV symptoms of MDE (nine symptoms) and GAD (eight symptoms). IRT scores for depression (INS-D) and anxiety (INS-G), based on response patterns, were obtained by means of a 2-parameter model. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed with receiver operating characteristic analysis, using a blinded MINI interview as gold standard. Scores' construct validity was compared with external clinician-administered (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, HRSD; Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, HAM-A) and self-reported severity measures (PHQ-9; Beck Anxiety Inventory-Subjective Aspects, BAI-Sub). Responsiveness was analyzed based on the evolution of HRSD and HAM-A scores.

resultsBoth severity scores showed excellent reliability (INS-D: 0.92; INS-G: 0.93) and yielded high diagnostic accuracy (INS-D: AUC = 0.96; INS-G: AUC = 0.91) with respect to MINI diagnoses. INS-D and INS-G had higher correlations with clinician-administered measures of the same disorder (INS-D-HRSD: 0.73; INS-G-HAM-A: 0.53) than with self-reported measures (INS-D-PHQ-9: 0.69; INS-G-BAI-Sub: 0.49). Patients who recovered during follow-up showed important decreases in severity (Cohen's d INS-D:-1.38; INS-G: -1.75). About 90 % variance of INS-D and INS-G score changes over time was associated with changes in clinical status.

conclusionsINS-D and INS-G are short reliable, valid, and responsive measures that can be used for diagnostic and severity assessment of mood and anxiety disorders in outpatient care.

Indexed as

Psychiatric Status Rating ScalesAdultAgedAnxiety DisordersCohort StudiesDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersFemaleHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMiddle AgedOutpatientsProspective StudiesQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID25281010
OpenAlexW2046640479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.