ArticleBMC research notes2018
One consensual depression diagnosis tool to serve many countries: a challenge! A RAND/UCLA methodology.
Article in BMC research notes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Compositional Associations of 24-h Movement Behaviors With Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms in Middle-Aged Adults.Depression and anxiety · 2026Article
- Correlates of maternal depression, anxiety and functioning across an urban-rural gradient in northern Ecuador.Global public health · 2024Article
- Application of the Delphi Method in the Study of Depressive Disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Review
- Measuring depression in Primary Health Care in Spain: Psychometric properties and diagnostic accuracy of HSCL-5 and HSCL-10.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Validation and Psychometric Properties of the Spanish Version of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 Scale for Depression Detection in Primary Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- [Translation and cross-cultural adaptation into Spanish, Catalan and Galician of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 to identify depression in Primary Care].Atencion primaria · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveFrom a systematic literature review (SLR), it became clear that a consensually validated tool was needed by European General Practitioner (GP) researchers in order to allow multi-centred collaborative research, in daily practice, throughout Europe. Which diagnostic tool for depression, validated against psychiatric examination according to the DSM, would GPs select as the best for use in clinical research, taking into account the combination of effectiveness, reliability and ergonomics? A RAND/UCLA, which combines the qualities of the Delphi process and of the nominal group, was used. GP researchers from different European countries were selected. The SLR extracted tools were validated against the DSM. The Youden index was used as an effectiveness criterion and Cronbach's alpha as a reliability criterion. Ergonomics data were extracted from the literature. Ergonomics were tested face-to-face.
resultsThe SLR extracted 7 tools. Two instruments were considered sufficiently effective and reliable for use: the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Hopkins Symptoms Checklist-25 (HSCL-25). After testing face-to-face, HSCL-25 was selected. A multicultural consensus on one diagnostic tool for depression was obtained for the HSCL-25. This tool will provide the opportunity to select homogeneous populations for European collaborative research in daily practice.
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.