ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2024
Are there subgroup differences in the accuracy of 'screening' questions for mood and anxiety disorder diagnostic interviews?
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Are there subgroup differences in the accuracy of 'screening' questions for mood and anxiety disorder diagnostic interviews?International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the impact of potential measurement bias (i.e., differential item functioning [DIF]) across sex, age, employment, location, and substance use disorders on the screening properties of epidemiological surveys that utilise screening questions when estimating prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders.
methodsData comprised of 15,893 respondents who completed the 2020-2022 Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing. Questions from the screening module of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 3.0 were analysed using confirmatory factor analysis and DIF across subgroups of interest. Sensitivity, specificity, and classification rate were derived and compared across models that did and did not adjust for significant levels of DIF.
resultsSources of DIF were identified across the items was due to age and sex at birth with relatively fewer items displaying DIF across employment, location, and substance use disorders. In terms of screening, the absolute differences in sensitivity and specificity between the DIF-free and DIF models ranged from 0.001 to 0.091.
conclusionsThe current study found some evidence of DIF in the screening questions used to evaluate mental health disorder prevalence. However, the overall influence of DIF on screening into at least one mood and anxiety disorder module was found to be minimal.
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.