ArticleBMJ open2016
Defining adolescent common mental disorders using electronic primary care data: a comparison with outcomes measured using the CIS-R.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Case-finding for common mental disorders in primary care using routinely collected data: a systematic review.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2019Pooled it
- Validation of the patient health questionnaire-9 and the generalized anxiety disorder-7 in Lithuanian student sample.PloS one · 2022Trial
- Diagnosis provision by young people's mental health services: a comparison with epidemiological data.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Self-harm before and during imprisonment: cohort study of males in prison linking population-based routinely collected data in Wales.BJPsych open · 2025Article
- A methylome-wide association study of major depression with out-of-sample case-control classification and trans-ancestry comparison.Nature. Mental health · 2025Article
- Assessment of common mental disorders in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) birth cohort at age 24 years using the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised (CIS-R).Wellcome open research · 2025Article
- Disagreement concerning atopic dermatitis subtypes between an English prospective cohort (ALSPAC) and linked electronic health records.Clinical and experimental dermatology · 2024Article
- Paid Employment and Mental Health in 65-74-Year-Olds: Analysis of National Data From 2000, 2007 and 2014.International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Complete case logistic regression with a dichotomised continuous outcome led to biased estimates.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2023Article
- Article
- Anxiety and depression among children and young people involved in family justice court proceedings: longitudinal national data linkage study.BJPsych open · 2022Article
- Article
- Factors associated with participation over time in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children: a study using linked education and primary care data.International journal of epidemiology · 2021Article
- Article
- Ascertaining and classifying cases of congenital anomalies in the ALSPAC birth cohort.Wellcome open research · 2020Article
- Article
- School achievement as a predictor of depression and self-harm in adolescence: linked education and health record study.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the prevalence of common mental disorders (CMDs) derived from data held in primary care records with that measured using the revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R) in order to assess the potential robustness of findings based only on routinely collected data. DESIGN AND
settingComparison study using linkage between the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) and electronic primary care records.
participantsWe studied 1562 adolescents who had completed the CIS-R in ALSPAC at age 17-18 years and had linkage established to their primary care records. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures from ALSPAC were whether or not an individual met International Classification of Diseases-10 criteria for a diagnosis of (1) a CMD or, specifically, (2) depression. Lists of Read codes corresponding to diagnoses, symptoms and treatments were used to create 12 definitions of CMD and depression alone using the primary care data. We calculated sensitivities and specificities of these, using CIS-R definitions as the reference standard.
resultsSensitivities ranged from 5.2% to 24.3% for depression and from 3.8% to 19.2% for CMD. The specificities of all definitions were above 98% for depression and above 96% for CMD.For both outcomes, the definition that included current diagnosis, treatment or symptoms identified the highest proportion of CIS-R cases.
conclusionsMost individuals meeting case definitions for CMD based on primary care data also met CIS-R case definitions. Conversely many individuals identified as cases using the CIS-R had no evidence of CMD in their clinical records. This suggests that clinical databases are likely to yield underestimates of the burden of CMD in the population. However, clinical records appear to yield valid diagnoses which may be useful for studying risk factors and consequences of CMD. The greatest epidemiological value may be obtained when information is available from survey and clinical records.
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.