Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31014295›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2019

Psychometric evaluation of a screening question for persistent depressive disorder.

Elisa Brinkmann, Sarah Glanert, Michael Hüppe, Ana Sofia Moncada Garay, Sophie Tschepe, Ulrich Schweiger, Jan Philipp Klein

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elisa BrinkmannDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Lübeck, 23562, Lübeck, Germany. elisabrinkmann@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-1843-4731
Sarah GlanertDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Lübeck, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.
Michael HüppeDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Lübeck, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.
Ana Sofia Moncada GarayDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Lübeck, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.
Sophie TschepeDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Lübeck, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.
Ulrich SchweigerDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Lübeck, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.
Jan Philipp KleinDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Lübeck, 23562, Lübeck, Germany.
University of Lübeck · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAbout one in five patients with depression experiences a chronic course. Despite the great burden associated with this disease, there is no current screening instrument for Persistent Depressive Disorder (PDD). In the present study, we examine a short screening test, the persistent depression screener (PDS), that we developed for DSM-5 PDD. The PDS is comprised of one question that is administered following an initial self-assessment for depression.

methodsNinety patients from an inpatient clinic/day clinic specialized in treating depression completed the PDS. They were also assessed using a structured clinical interview covering the DSM-5 criteria for PDD. Retest reliability was examined after two weeks (n = 69, 77%).

resultsIn this sample, the prevalence of PDD was 64%. Sensitivity of the PDS was 85% with a positive predictive value of 80%. Specificity was 63%. Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 2.3 and .24, respectively. Agreement between the PDS results and the outcome of the clinical interview was moderate (Cohen's Kappa κ = .48 ([95%-CI .28, .68], p < .001, SE = 0.10)). Prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted Kappa was PABAK = .53. Retest reliability of the PDS was moderate (Cohen's Kappa κ = .52 ([95%-CI .3, .74], p < .001, SE = 0.11)).

conclusionsThe present study shows that the PDS - when applied following a self-rating depression scale - might be a valid and reliable way to detect PDD. However, the results of the PDS must be confirmed by a diagnostic interview.

Indexed as

Self-AssessmentAdultBrief Psychiatric Rating ScaleDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersFemaleHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultDepressive disordersDiagnostic interviewDysthymiaPersistent depressive disorderRater agreementScreening question

Identifiers

PMID31014295
PMCPMC6480904
OpenAlexW2944923130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.