Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33172939›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Simulation study to demonstrate biases created by diagnostic criteria of mental illnesses: major depressive episodes, dysthymia, and manic episodes.

Yi-Sheng Chao, Kuan-Fu Lin, Chao-Jung Wu, Hsing-Chien Wu, Hui-Ting Hsu, Lien-Cheng Tsao, Yen-Po Cheng, Yi-Chun Lai, Wei-Chih Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Yi-Sheng ChaoIndependent researcher, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4019-3586
Kuan-Fu LinPsychiatry, National Taiwan University Hospital Yun-Lin Branch, Douliou, Taiwan, Taiwan.
Chao-Jung WuDépartement d'informatique, UQAM, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Hsing-Chien WuInternal Medicine, Taipei Hospital, Xinzhuang, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hui-Ting HsuPathology, Changhua Christian Healthcare System, Changhua, Taiwan, Taiwan.
Lien-Cheng TsaoSurgery, Changhua Christian Healthcare System, Changhua, Taiwan, Taiwan.
Yen-Po ChengSurgery, Changhua Christian Healthcare System, Changhua, Taiwan, Taiwan.
Yi-Chun LaiChest Medicine, National Yang Ming University Hospital, Ilan, Taiwan, Taiwan.
Wei-Chih ChenDepartment of Chest Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan wiji.chen@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesComposite diagnostic criteria alone are likely to create and introduce biases into diagnoses that subsequently have poor relationships with input symptoms. This study aims to understand the relationships between the diagnoses and the input symptoms, as well as the magnitudes of biases created by diagnostic criteria and introduced into the diagnoses of mental illnesses with large disease burdens (major depressive episodes, dysthymic disorder, and manic episodes). SETTINGS: General psychiatric care.

participantsWithout real-world data available to the public, 100 000 subjects were simulated and the input symptoms were assigned based on the assumed prevalence rates (0.05, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5 and 0.7) and correlations between symptoms (0, 0.1, 0.4, 0.7 and 0.9). The input symptoms were extracted from the diagnostic criteria. The diagnostic criteria were transformed into mathematical equations to demonstrate the sources of biases and convert the input symptoms into diagnoses. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The relationships between the input symptoms and diagnoses were interpreted using forward stepwise linear regressions. Biases due to data censoring or categorisation introduced into the intermediate variables, and the three diagnoses were measured.

resultsThe prevalence rates of the diagnoses were lower than those of the input symptoms and proportional to the assumed prevalence rates and the correlations between the input symptoms. Certain input or bias variables consistently explained the diagnoses better than the others. Except for 0 correlations and 0.7 prevalence rates of the input symptoms for the diagnosis of dysthymic disorder, the input symptoms could not fully explain the diagnoses.

conclusionsThere are biases created due to composite diagnostic criteria and introduced into the diagnoses. The design of the diagnostic criteria determines the prevalence of the diagnoses and the relationships between the input symptoms, the diagnoses, and the biases. The importance of the input symptoms has been distorted largely by the diagnostic criteria.

Indexed as

Dysthymic DisorderMajor Depressive DisorderBiasHumansManiaPrevalencebiasforward-stepwise regressionfrailtyindex miningthe health and retirement study

Identifiers

PMID33172939
PMCPMC7656951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.