ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023
Review of the psychometric properties of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) Spanish version in a sample of Puerto Rican workers.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Decolonizing mental health: how native languages reshape depression network architecture in 31,276 Peruvians.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Psychometric Assessment of Screening Measures for Depression, Anxiety, Somatization, and Life Satisfaction in Honduran University Students.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Factorial invariance of the Spanish version of the PHQ-9 by gender and country in Latin America and the Caribbean.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Exploring mental health implications of informal caregiving for the older adult within the Hispanic community: an in-depth cross-cultural analysis of depression symptoms.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Reliability and convergent validity of the PHQ-2 for the rapid detection of depressive symptoms in healthcare professionals in Argentina.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to examine the internal structure and assess the psychometric properties of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) in a Puerto Rican sample of workers. This instrument is a nine-item questionnaire, which was conceptualized as a unidimensional structure; however, there are mixed results regarding this internal structure. This measure is used in the occupational health psychology context in organizations in Puerto Rico; nevertheless, there is little evidence of its psychometric properties with samples of workers. Materials and methods: A total of 955 samples from two different study samples were used in this cross-sectional study design in which the PHQ-9 was used. We conducted confirmatory factor analysis, bifactor analysis, and random intercept item factor analysis to examine the internal structure of the PHQ-9. Moreover, a two-factor model was examined by randomly assigning items to the two factors. Measurement invariance across sex and the relationship with other constructs were examined. Results: The best-fitted model was the bifactor model followed by the random intercept item factor. The five sets of two-factor models with items randomly assigned obtained acceptable and similar fit indices regardless of the items. Conclusion: The results suggest that the PHQ-9 appears to be a reliable and valid instrument to measure depression. The more parsimonious interpretation of its scores, for now, is a unidimensional structure. Comparison across sex appears to be useful in occupational health psychology research settings since the results suggest that the PHQ-9 is invariant regarding this variable.
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.