ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023
Factor structure of the patient health questionnaire-4 in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometric properties and age- and gender-specific normative values of the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 among older adults aged 60 years and above.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Psychometric properties of the ultra-brief self-report Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) to assess anxiety and depression in Arabic-speaking adults.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Longitudinal measurement invariance and psychometric properties of the Patient Health Questionnaire-Four in China.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Factor structure and measurement invariance of the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 among the Chilean population.PloS one · 2024Article
- Measuring patient satisfaction with four items: validity of the client satisfaction questionnaire 4 in an outpatient population.BMC psychiatry · 2023Article
- The construct validity of an abridged version of the general self-efficacy scale for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Persons with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) frequently experience symptoms of anxiety and depression. In this population, there is a need for validated brief self-report screening questionnaires to assess the severity of comorbid mental health problems. The Patient Health Questionnaire 4 (PHQ-4) is a self-report questionnaire that may contribute to this purpose as it can screen for both disorders efficiently. However, this will be the first study examining the factor structure of the PHQ-4 in samples of adults with ADHD, and also evaluating the validity of the Norwegian version of the PHQ-4. Objectives: The aim of the current cross-sectional study was to examine the factor structure and validity of the Norwegian version of the PHQ-4 in a sample of adults who reported having been diagnosed with ADHD. Methods: Of 496 invited, a total of 326 participants (66%) completed the PHQ-4, The World Health Organization Five Well-Being Index, the Oslo Social Support Scale and the 4-item Perceived Stress Scale electronically in a web-portal between the 9th and 30th of June 2020. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis of the PHQ-4 supported a two-factor structure [RMSEA = 0.038 (90% CI 0.000-0.159), CFI = 1.00, TLI = 0.999, SRMR = 0.004], consisting of a depression factor and an anxiety factor. Standardized factor loadings were 0.79 to 0.97. The PHQ-4 was negatively correlated with well-being and social support and positively correlated with perceived level of stress. Conclusion: This study indicates promising psychometric properties of the PHQ-4 as a measure of anxiety and depressive symptoms in adults with self-reported ADHD who are fluent in Norwegian. The questionnaire's brevity makes it a valuable resource in research and clinical settings. However, more studies are needed to test the instrument in a clinical sample.
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.