Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39565620›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2024

Measurement Properties of the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 and Somatic Symptom Scale-8: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jonna Hybelius, Amanda Kosic, Sigrid Salomonsson, Caroline Wachtler, John Wallert, Steven Nordin, Erland Axelsson

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jonna HybeliusDivision of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.
Amanda KosicSchool of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Sigrid SalomonssonCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Caroline WachtlerDivision of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.
John WallertCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Steven NordinDepartment of Psychology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Erland AxelssonDivision of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The subjective experience of somatic symptoms is a key concern throughout the health care system. Valid and clinically useful instruments are needed. Objective: To evaluate the measurement properties of 2 widespread patient-reported outcomes: the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) and Somatic Symptom Scale-8 (SSS-8). Data Sources: Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were last searched February 1, 2024. Study Selection: English-language studies reporting estimates pertaining to factor analysis, taxometric analysis, internal consistency, construct validity, mean scores in relevant groups, cutoffs, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs), minimal clinically important difference, test-retest reliability, or sensitivity to change. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Search hits were reviewed by independent raters. Cronbach α, Pearson r, means, and between-group effect sizes indicative of sensitivity to change were pooled in random-effects meta-analysis. Study quality was assessed using 3 instruments. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: Comprehensive overview of evidence pertaining to the measurement properties of the PHQ-15 and SSS-8. Results: A total of 305 studies with 361 243 participants were included. Most concerned routine care (178 studies) and the general population (27 studies). In factor analyses, both scales reflected a combination of domain-specific factors (cardiopulmonary, fatigue, gastrointestinal, pain) and a general symptom burden factor. The pooled PHQ-15 α was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.80-0.82), but with low item-total correlations for items concerning menstrual problems, fainting spells, and sexual problems (item-total correlations <0.40), and the SSS-8 α was 0.80 (0.77-0.83). Pooled correlations with other measures of somatic symptom burden were 0.71 (95% CI, 0.64-0.78) for the PHQ-15 and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.92) for the SSS-8. Reported AUROCs for identification of somatoform disorders ranged from 0.63 (95% CI, 0.50-0.76) to 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.85) for the PHQ-15 and from 0.71 (95% CI, 0.66-0.77) to 0.73 (95% CI, 0.69-0.76) for the SSS-8. The minimal clinically important difference on both scales was 3 points. Test-retest reliability could not be pooled and was inconsistent for the PHQ-15 (PHQ-15: r = 0.65-0.93; ICC, 0.87; SSS-8: r = 0.996, ICC = 0.89). The PHQ-15 showed tentative sensitivity to change (g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.08-0.56), but data for the SSS-8 were lacking. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, findings supported use of the PHQ-15 and SSS-8 for the assessment of symptom burden, but users should be aware of the complex, multifactorial structures of these scales. More evidence is needed concerning longitudinal measurement properties.

Indexed as

Medically Unexplained SymptomsPatient Health QuestionnaireAdultFemaleHumansMalePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPsychometricsReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID39565620
PMCPMC11579800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.