ArticleBMJ open2024
Development and psychometric evaluation of a questionnaire for the assessment of depression in primary care: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associations between community contextual factors and depressive symptoms: postcode-based data linkage of POKAL survey data with publicly available German routine data.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026Article
- Evaluating gender differences in depression screening: diagnostic accuracy and measurement invariance of the DESY-PC questionnaire in primary care.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026Article
- Development and validation of the SuPr-10 questionnaire for suicidality assessment in primary care patients with depressive symptoms.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A multimodal approach to depression diagnosis: insights from machine learning algorithm development in primary care.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop a new questionnaire for the diagnostic assessment of depression adapted to the primary care setting by combining psychiatric criteria and heuristics of general practitioners (GPs). Psychometric evaluation of the new questionnaire and first validity evidence.
designThe questionnaire was developed using cognitive interviews with think-aloud technique. Factorial validity was then examined in a cross-sectional study.
settingPrimary care. Five general practices in Bavaria, Germany.
participants15 GPs, 4 psychiatrists/psychotherapists and 13 patients participated in cognitive expert interviews. A primary care sample of N=277 consecutive patients participated in the cross-sectional study.
methodsAfter consultation with experts and literature research, the questionnaire contained a self-rating part for patients and an external part for GPs. Items were then iteratively optimised using cognitive interviews. Factorial validity was examined. To estimate internal consistency, Cronbach's α was calculated. Validity was assessed by correlating the new questionnaire and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9).
resultsThe preliminary version of the two-part 'Questionnaire for the assessment of DEpression SYmptoms in Primary Care' (DESY-PC) comprised 52 items for patients (DESY-PAT-1: questions about patient's environment; DESY-PAT-2: questions about depression-specific symptoms) and 21 items for GPs (DESY-GP). The analysis of the DESY-PAT-1 revealed a one-factor solution ('environmental factors') with Cronbach's α of 0.55. The items of the DESY-PAT-2 were assigned to three factors, 'depressive cognitions', 'suicidality' and 'symptoms of fatigue', with Cronbach's α of 0.86, 0.79 and 0.85, respectively. Factorial analysis revealed two factors for the DESY-GP: 'depression symptoms' and 'medical history/external factors'. Cronbach's α was 0.90 and 0.59, respectively. After factorial analysis, the DESY-PAT was reduced to 28 items, and the DESY-GP was reduced to 15 items. Correlations of the DESY-PC with the PHQ-9 were high and significant, indicating convergent validity.
conclusionsThe new questionnaire represents an innovative extension of depression questionnaires and could be particularly suitable for general practices.
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.