初级保健筛查对初级保健中情感性障碍(PC-SAD)的诊断准确性。

Q2 Medicine Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health Pub Date : 2013-10-04 eCollection Date: 2013-01-01 DOI:10.2174/1745017901309010164
Angelo Picardi, D A Adler, W H Rogers, I Lega, M P Zerella, G Matteucci, L Tarsitani, M Caredda, A Gigantesco, M Biondi
{"title":"初级保健筛查对初级保健中情感性障碍(PC-SAD)的诊断准确性。","authors":"Angelo Picardi,&nbsp;D A Adler,&nbsp;W H Rogers,&nbsp;I Lega,&nbsp;M P Zerella,&nbsp;G Matteucci,&nbsp;L Tarsitani,&nbsp;M Caredda,&nbsp;A Gigantesco,&nbsp;M Biondi","doi":"10.2174/1745017901309010164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Depression goes often unrecognised and untreated in non-psychiatric medical settings. Screening has recently gained acceptance as a first step towards improving depression recognition and management. The Primary Care Screener for Affective Disorders (PC-SAD) is a self-administered questionnaire to screen for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and Dysthymic Disorder (Dys) which has a sophisticated scoring algorithm that confers several advantages. This study tested its performance against a 'gold standard' diagnostic interview in primary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 416 adults attending 13 urban general internal medicine primary care practices completed the PC-SAD. Of 409 who returned a valid PC-SAD, all those scoring positive (N=151) and a random sample (N=106) of those scoring negative were selected for a 3-month telephone follow-up assessment including the administration of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders (SCID-I) by a psychiatrist who was masked to PC-SAD results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most selected patients (N=212) took part in the follow-up assessment. After adjustment for partial verification bias the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value for MDD were 90%, 83%, 51%, and 98%. For Dys, the corresponding figures were 78%, 79%, 8%, and 88%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While some study limitations suggest caution in interpreting our results, this study corroborated the diagnostic validity of the PC-SAD, although the low PPV may limit its usefulness with regard to Dys. Given its good psychometric properties and the short average administration time, the PC-SAD might be the screening instrument of choice in settings where the technology for computer automated scoring is available.</p>","PeriodicalId":35447,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health","volume":" ","pages":"164-70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/be/ed/CPEMH-9-164.PMC3804886.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic Accuracy of the Primary Care Screener for Affective Disorder (PC-SAD) in Primary Care.\",\"authors\":\"Angelo Picardi,&nbsp;D A Adler,&nbsp;W H Rogers,&nbsp;I Lega,&nbsp;M P Zerella,&nbsp;G Matteucci,&nbsp;L Tarsitani,&nbsp;M Caredda,&nbsp;A Gigantesco,&nbsp;M Biondi\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1745017901309010164\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Depression goes often unrecognised and untreated in non-psychiatric medical settings. Screening has recently gained acceptance as a first step towards improving depression recognition and management. The Primary Care Screener for Affective Disorders (PC-SAD) is a self-administered questionnaire to screen for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and Dysthymic Disorder (Dys) which has a sophisticated scoring algorithm that confers several advantages. This study tested its performance against a 'gold standard' diagnostic interview in primary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 416 adults attending 13 urban general internal medicine primary care practices completed the PC-SAD. Of 409 who returned a valid PC-SAD, all those scoring positive (N=151) and a random sample (N=106) of those scoring negative were selected for a 3-month telephone follow-up assessment including the administration of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders (SCID-I) by a psychiatrist who was masked to PC-SAD results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most selected patients (N=212) took part in the follow-up assessment. After adjustment for partial verification bias the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value for MDD were 90%, 83%, 51%, and 98%. For Dys, the corresponding figures were 78%, 79%, 8%, and 88%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While some study limitations suggest caution in interpreting our results, this study corroborated the diagnostic validity of the PC-SAD, although the low PPV may limit its usefulness with regard to Dys. Given its good psychometric properties and the short average administration time, the PC-SAD might be the screening instrument of choice in settings where the technology for computer automated scoring is available.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35447,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"164-70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/be/ed/CPEMH-9-164.PMC3804886.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1745017901309010164\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1745017901309010164","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

背景:在非精神医学环境中,抑郁症往往未被识别和治疗。最近,筛查作为改善抑郁症识别和管理的第一步得到了认可。情感障碍初级保健筛查(PC-SAD)是一种自我管理的问卷,用于筛查重度抑郁障碍(MDD)和心境恶劣障碍(Dys),它具有复杂的评分算法,具有几个优点。这项研究针对初级保健的“黄金标准”诊断面谈测试了它的表现。方法:共有416名参加13个城市普通内科初级保健诊所的成年人完成了PC-SAD。在409名返回有效PC-SAD的患者中,选择所有得分为阳性的(N=151)和随机抽样(N=106)得分为阴性的患者进行为期3个月的电话随访评估,包括由一名对PC-SAD结果不知情的精神科医生进行DSM-IV-TR轴I障碍(SCID-I)的结构化临床访谈。结果:大部分入选患者(N=212)参加了随访评估。调整部分验证偏倚后,MDD的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为90%、83%、51%和98%。对于Dys,相应的数字分别为78%,79%,8%和88%。结论:虽然一些研究的局限性提示在解释我们的结果时要谨慎,但本研究证实了PC-SAD的诊断有效性,尽管低PPV可能会限制其对Dys的有用性。鉴于其良好的心理测量特性和较短的平均管理时间,PC-SAD可能是在计算机自动评分技术可用的环境中选择的筛选工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Diagnostic Accuracy of the Primary Care Screener for Affective Disorder (PC-SAD) in Primary Care.

Background: Depression goes often unrecognised and untreated in non-psychiatric medical settings. Screening has recently gained acceptance as a first step towards improving depression recognition and management. The Primary Care Screener for Affective Disorders (PC-SAD) is a self-administered questionnaire to screen for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and Dysthymic Disorder (Dys) which has a sophisticated scoring algorithm that confers several advantages. This study tested its performance against a 'gold standard' diagnostic interview in primary care.

Methods: A total of 416 adults attending 13 urban general internal medicine primary care practices completed the PC-SAD. Of 409 who returned a valid PC-SAD, all those scoring positive (N=151) and a random sample (N=106) of those scoring negative were selected for a 3-month telephone follow-up assessment including the administration of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders (SCID-I) by a psychiatrist who was masked to PC-SAD results.

Results: Most selected patients (N=212) took part in the follow-up assessment. After adjustment for partial verification bias the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value for MDD were 90%, 83%, 51%, and 98%. For Dys, the corresponding figures were 78%, 79%, 8%, and 88%.

Conclusions: While some study limitations suggest caution in interpreting our results, this study corroborated the diagnostic validity of the PC-SAD, although the low PPV may limit its usefulness with regard to Dys. Given its good psychometric properties and the short average administration time, the PC-SAD might be the screening instrument of choice in settings where the technology for computer automated scoring is available.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health
Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Clinical Practice & Epidemiology in Mental Health is an open access online journal, which publishes Research articles, Reviews, Letters in all areas of clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health covering the following topics: Clinical and epidemiological research in psychiatry and mental health; diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of mental health conditions; and frequencies and determinants of mental health conditions in the community and the populations at risk; research and economic aspects of psychiatry, with special attention given to manuscripts presenting new results and methods in the area; and clinical epidemiologic investigation of pharmaceutical agents. Clinical Practice & Epidemiology in Mental Health, a peer reviewed journal, aims to provide the most complete and reliable source of information on current developments in the field. The emphasis will be on publishing quality articles rapidly and freely available worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Are Nurses Working in Mental Health in a Time of Changing Approaches More Exposed to Stress than other Professionals? Job Satisfaction and Perception of Respect for the Rights of Users in Seven Different Countries Worldwide. Obsessive-compulsive Symptoms Prevalence among Medical Students in Four Major Universities, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Pharmacogenetic Testing in Treatment-resistant Panic Disorder: a Preliminary Analysis. Exploring Mental Health Issues and Priorities in Indonesia Through Qualitative Expert Consensus. Factors Associated with Stress among Healthcare Personnel after COVID-19 in Northeast Thailand: A Cross-sectional Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1