ArticleJournal of psychiatric research2026
Predictive validity of the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-4 and Florida Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-II severity scale.
Article in Journal of psychiatric research, 2026. 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.
- Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder in three understudied populations: A review of Latino, Black, and Sexual & Gender Minority Individuals.Current psychiatry reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Efficient and accurate screening tools are crucial for improving early identification and treatment outcomes among individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). This study evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of two OCD screening measures: the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-4 (OCI-4) and the Florida Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-II (FOCI-II) severity scale. The measures were administered in a large transnational sample of Spanish speaking Latin American adults (N = 1696) with elevated obsessive-compulsive symptomatology. Participants completed diagnostic interviews (MINI and Y-BOCS) and self-report assessments across 23 sites in 11 countries. Both measures significantly distinguished OCD from non-OCD cases, with the FOCI-II demonstrating somewhat better predictive performance (AUC = .79) compared to the OCI-4 (AUC = .69). A score of 7 or greater for both the OCI-4 (64 % sensitivity, 66 % specificity) and FOCI-II severity scale (74 % sensitivity, 70 % specificity) were found to be the most appropriate cutoffs across the overall sample. Findings provide some support in the use of both tools in clinical and research contexts, with some comparative benefits of the FOCI-II.
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.