Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorOrive Calzada, Miren
dc.contributor.authorPadierna, Angel
dc.contributor.authorQuintana, Jose María
dc.contributor.authorCarlota, Las Hayas
dc.contributor.authorKalliopi, Vrotsou
dc.contributor.authorAguirre, Urko
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-07T20:07:57Z
dc.date.available2024-02-07T20:07:57Z
dc.date.issued2010-10
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Psychosomatic Research 69(4) : 399-406 (2010)
dc.identifier.issn0022-3999
dc.identifier.issn1879-1360
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10810/64754
dc.description.abstractObjective: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of four depression screening tools commonly used in patients with medical disorders, relative to a reference diagnostic standard – a structured psychiatric interview. Methods: The Depression in the Medically Ill-18 (DMI-18) questionnaire was administered to 167 patients with medical disorders, of those 53 completed the Beck Depression Inventory for Primary Care (BDI-PC), 67 the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and 46 the Patient Health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). The entire sample was also interviewed with a structured psychiatric interview conducted by a mental health professional. Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR) and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated and compared for the different measures. Results: At their respective recommended cut-off points, sensitivities (95% CI) were 86% (70-95), 82% (63-94), 93% (86-97) and 68% (47-85) for the HADS-D, BDI-PC, DMI-18, and PHQ-9 respectively, while specificities ranged from 72% (47-90) for BDI-PC to 89% (72-98) for PHQ-9. The sensitivities of DMI-18 were significantly higher compared to those of HADS-D (p= 0.045) and PHQ-9 (p= 0.01). The PHQ-9 questionnaire obtained the most favourable positive LR (6.35; 95% CI: 2.48-18.36). In contrast, the DMI-18 showed the best negative LR (0.09; 95% CI: 0.04-0.18). AUCs (95% CI) ranged from 0.92 (0.83-1.02) to 0.84 (0.74-0.94). Staistically significant differences were found between the AUCs of the DMI-10 and the BDI-PC. Conclusion: Our results suggest that all evaluated scales have acceptable abilities and can be used as screening instruments for depression in patients with medical disorders. The DMI stands out for its sensitivity.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was supported by a grant from the Salud Carlos III Institute (PI06/90421)
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subjectdepressiones_ES
dc.subjectscreening
dc.subjectmedical disorder
dc.subjectpsychometrics
dc.titleDetecting depression in medically ill patients: comparative accuracy of four screening questionnaires and physicians' diagnoses in Spanish populationes_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.rights.holder© 2010 Elsevier under CC BY-NCND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022399910001704
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.04.007
dc.departamentoesPsicología Social
dc.departamentoesGizarte Psikologia


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2010 Elsevier under CC BY-NCND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2010 Elsevier under CC BY-NCND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)