OBJECTIVE: Adjustment disorders (ADs) and major depressive disorder (MDD) are often the most prevalent psychiatric disorders among cancer patients. This study's objective was to determine the overall performance of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) as a screening instrument in identifying cases of psychiatric morbidity such as ADs and MDD. METHODS: Two hundred and four consecutive patients completed a questionnaire including a demographic and clinical data form, HADS, and were examined with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). The screening performance of HADS was investigated by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUC), rates of specificity, and sensitivity. RESULTS: For MDD; the AUC was 0.77 on the HADS total, the AUC was 0.79 on the HADS depression subscale, and was 0.72 on the anxiety subscale. For ADs; the results were 0.74, 0.74, and 0.70 respectively. Findings indicated that a HADS total cut-off score of > or =17 to be optimal in identifying cases of MDD. This cut-off score offered a sensitivity of 0.70 and a specificity of 0.80. Findings suggested that a HADS total cut-off score of 10 was the optimal combination of sensitivity (0.84) and specificity (0.55) for ADs. When compared with SCID, the percentage of cases identified by HADS was 28% for MDD and 22% for ADs. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SCID, HADS was found to have acceptable levels of sensitivity and specificity in detecting psychiatric morbidity especially for MDD and HADS can be recommended with reservations as a screening tool for breast cancer patients. (c) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
OBJECTIVE: Adjustment disorders (ADs) and major depressive disorder (MDD) are often the most prevalent psychiatric disorders among cancerpatients. This study's objective was to determine the overall performance of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) as a screening instrument in identifying cases of psychiatric morbidity such as ADs and MDD. METHODS: Two hundred and four consecutive patients completed a questionnaire including a demographic and clinical data form, HADS, and were examined with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). The screening performance of HADS was investigated by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUC), rates of specificity, and sensitivity. RESULTS: For MDD; the AUC was 0.77 on the HADS total, the AUC was 0.79 on the HADS depression subscale, and was 0.72 on the anxiety subscale. For ADs; the results were 0.74, 0.74, and 0.70 respectively. Findings indicated that a HADS total cut-off score of > or =17 to be optimal in identifying cases of MDD. This cut-off score offered a sensitivity of 0.70 and a specificity of 0.80. Findings suggested that a HADS total cut-off score of 10 was the optimal combination of sensitivity (0.84) and specificity (0.55) for ADs. When compared with SCID, the percentage of cases identified by HADS was 28% for MDD and 22% for ADs. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SCID, HADS was found to have acceptable levels of sensitivity and specificity in detecting psychiatric morbidity especially for MDD and HADS can be recommended with reservations as a screening tool for breast cancerpatients. (c) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors: Nicholas Meader; Alex J Mitchell; Carolyn Chew-Graham; David Goldberg; Maria Rizzo; Victoria Bird; David Kessler; Jon Packham; Mark Haddad; Stephen Pilling Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Janice A Blalock; Cho Lam; Jennifer A Minnix; Maher Karam-Hage; Ellen R Gritz; Jason D Robinson; Paul M Cinciripini Journal: J Cogn Psychother Date: 2011
Authors: Anna Meijer; Michelle Roseman; Katherine Milette; James C Coyne; Michael E Stefanek; Roy C Ziegelstein; Erin Arthurs; Allison Leavens; Steven C Palmer; Donna E Stewart; Peter de Jonge; Brett D Thombs Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-11-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Catherine Catherine; Vita Camellia; Muhammad Surya Husada; Bahagia Loebis; Elmeida Effendy; Mustafa Mahmud Amin Journal: Open Access Maced J Med Sci Date: 2019-05-12
Authors: Florie E van Beek; Lonneke M A Wijnhoven; Femke Jansen; José A E Custers; Eline J Aukema; Veerle M H Coupé; Pim Cuijpers; Marije L van der Lee; Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte; Ben Wijnen; Judith B Prins; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw Journal: BMC Psychol Date: 2019-12-23