MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065029747 · doi:10.3810/pgm.2012.09.2595

Evaluation of the 9–Item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ–9) as an Assessment Instrument for Symptoms of Depression in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis

2012· article· en· W2065029747 on OpenAlex
Kirsten Sjonnesen, Sandy Berzins, Kirsten M. Fiest, Andrew G. M. Bulloch, Luanne M. Metz, Brett D. Thombs, Scott B. Patten

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePostgraduate Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsMedicinePatient Health QuestionnaireDepression (economics)PopulationRank correlationCohortLogistic regressionPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryDepressive symptomsCognitionStatisticsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) have a high prevalence of depression, but there are concerns regarding assessment of possible depression status using rating scales, such as the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). The idea has been proposed that PHQ-9 scores are contaminated by the MS symptoms of fatigue and impaired concentration, decreasing the validity of measurement. OBJECTIVES: To determine the extent to which scores on the PHQ-9 are contaminated by patients reporting symptoms attributable to MS. METHODS: Baseline PHQ-9 scores from an ongoing prospective cohort study of depression in patients with MS (N = 173) were compared with those of a general population sample (N = 3304). Depression prevalence estimates for the MS and general population samples were calculated using conventional algorithm and cutoff point scoring methods, as well as modified scoring methods, excluding fatigue and concentration deficits. Correlations between scores on adjusted scoring methods were analyzed. The proportion that each item contributed to total PHQ-9 scores was also calculated. A logistic regression model evaluated the relationship between symptom severity and MS status corrected for age, sex, and other depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Conventional PHQ-9 algorithm and cutoff point scoring yielded 2-week prevalence estimates of 9.8% and 21.4%, respectively, in patients with MS, and 3.3% and 8.4%, respectively, in the general population. In both samples, conventional and modified scoring methods were strongly correlated (Spearman rank correlation coefficient > 0.9). The proportion of total scores contributed by fatigue and concentration items was not different between samples. With adjustment for other depressive symptoms, the MS sample had greater odds of endorsement for guilt (odds ratio, 2.17; P = 0.025) and fatigue (odds ratio, 1.51; P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: Inclusion or exclusion of fatigue and concentration items on the PHQ-9 scale does not substantially alter the performance of the scale. With use of the PHQ-9 in MS populations, we find no evidence to suggest that modified approaches to scoring are necessary.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it