ArticleBMC psychology2025
Validation of Shona Symptom Questionnaire (SSQ-14), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalised Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) in Unguja Island, Zanzibar.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDue to the dearth of resources in low- and middle-income countries, the use of culturally appropriate and psychometrically robust screening tools for common mental disorders (CMDs) administrable by lay health workers (LHWs) is critical to both identifying people that need care and collecting prevalence data to inform policy decisions. The Shona Symptom Questionnaire (SSQ-14), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalised Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7) were validated as part of introducing the Friendship Bench in Zanzibar, Tanzania.
methodsThe present cross-sectional study was conducted at two primary healthcare units. The three screening tools were translated into Swahili and administered to a random sample of 475 participants alongside a standardised clinical assessment done by a psychiatrist, the gold-standard diagnostic technique to which the performance characteristics of the tools were compared. The structural validity of the tools was assessed via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Reliability was measured using Cronbach’s alpha. Prevalence estimates of CMDs were derived from the clinical assessments.
resultsThe optimal cut-off point for the SSQ-14 was ≥ 7 (sensitivity = 76% and specificity = 70%); for the PHQ-9 was ≥ 5 (sensitivity = 69% and specificity = 63%); and for the GAD-7 was ≥ 3 (sensitivity = 69% and specificity = 64%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) indicated acceptable diagnostic accuracy, i.e., AUCSSQ-14 = 0.78, AUCPHQ-9 = 0.69 and AUCGAD-7 = 0.70. CFA yielded two- and one-factor structures for the PHQ-9 and GAD-7, and SSQ-14 respectively. The internal reliability of the tools was high, i.e.,αSSQ-14 = 0.82, αPHQ-9 = 0.81 and αGAD-7 = 0.83. The prevalence of CMDs, depression, and anxiety was of 25%, 18% and 8% respectively.
conclusionsThe tools are recommended for use by lay health workers in this setting and population. The high prevalence of CMDs reported highlights the importance of implementing evidence-based psychological interventions delivered by LHWs and reinforces the need for simple, validated, and culturally appropriate screening tools administrable by LHWs to do so, especially in low-resourced settings.
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.