Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40138731›Full record

ArticleClinical psychology & psychotherapy

Community Norms for the Symptom Questionnaire (SQ-48): Normalised T-Scores and Percentile Rank Order Scores.

Edwin de Beurs, Erik J Giltay, Ingrid V Carlier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical psychology & psychotherapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Edwin de BeursDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Leiden University, Netherlands and Arkin Mental Health Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3832-8477
Erik J GiltayDepartment of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8874-2292
Ingrid V CarlierDepartment of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6237-1438

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Use of standardised scores, such as T-scores and percentile rank order scores, enhances measurement-based care. They facilitate communication between therapists and clients about test results, particularly for multidimensional measures such as the Symptoms Questionnaire (SQ-48). By transforming raw scores into a common metric, clinicians can more easily interpret and discuss patient profiles of scores on the various scales of the measure. This study explored the advantages and disadvantages of standardised scores and percentile ranks, with a specific focus on T-scores, utilising cross-sectional data from a general population sample (N = 516) and a clinical sample (N = 242). We outline various approaches for establishing T-scores and provide illustrative examples. The analysis of the SQ-48 revealed the necessity of first normalising raw scores to obtain accurate T-scores. Normalisation based on an IRT model is deemed superior, but formulas converting summed scale scores provide a good approximation. Regarding percentile rank order scores, we demonstrated that clinical percentiles offer more meaningful interpretations than population-based percentiles, due to restriction of range for the latter among clinical subjects. Gender and age group differences were identified, with significantly higher scores for women and individuals aged 55 and older. Benefits of normalised T-scores and the need for gender- and age-specific norms for the SQ-48 are discussed.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersAdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsReference ValuesReproducibility of ResultsSex FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultmeasurement‐based carenormspercentilesroutine outcome monitoringSQ‐48T‐scores

Identifiers

PMID40138731
PMCPMC11945229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.