Literature DB >> 19345059

Screening for distress and depression in cancer patients: is ultrashort depression screening a valid measure in the UK? A prospective validation study.

Joseph Low1, Sue Gessler, Rachael Williams, Emma Daniells, Veronica Brough, Adrian Tookman, Louise Jones.   

Abstract

This study sought to validate the two-question (2Q) depression screen as a screening tool for psychological distress and depression against four criterion measures (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS], General Health Questionnaire-12, Brief Symptom Inventory-18 [BSI-18], and the distress thermometer) for a UK cancer population. We used a prospective cross-sectional study design. A consecutive sample of 399 outpatients from four outpatient oncology clinics and a palliative care day center in North London were initially identified. Of these, 249 were eligible, of whom 171 consented to take part. Data were analyzed using receiver operating characteristic analysis to examine the sensitivity and specificity of the 2Q depression instrument against the cutoff scores already shown to demonstrate clinically significant symptoms ("caseness") in the criterion measures. Sensitivity and specificity, with 95% confidence intervals, were calculated in addition to positive and negative predictive values. The 2Q depression screen showed sensitivity of 68%-89% and specificity of 70%-84% when compared with our four criterion measures in screening for psychological distress; its best performance was against the HADS (89% sensitivity and 79% specificity). In screening for depression, the 2Q depression screen showed sensitivity of 84%-94% and specificity of 72%-73% when compared with our two criterion measures, its best performance being against the BSI depression subscale (94% sensitivity and 72% specificity). Our study demonstrated that the 2Q depression screen showed good psychometric properties, which further supports its usefulness as a simple instrument in screening for psychological distress in cancer patients in the UK.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19345059     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2008.08.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage        ISSN: 0885-3924            Impact factor:   3.612


  4 in total

1.  Using Rasch analysis to examine the distress thermometer's cut-off scores among a mixed group of patients with cancer.

Authors:  Sylvie D Lambert; Julie F Pallant; Kerrie Clover; Benjamin Britton; Madeleine T King; Gregory Carter
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Evaluation of the psychological burden during the early disease trajectory in patients with intracranial tumors by the ultra-brief Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety (PHQ-4).

Authors:  Mirjam Renovanz; Sari Soebianto; Helena Tsakmaklis; Naureen Keric; Minou Nadji-Ohl; Manfred Beutel; Florian Ringel; Daniel Wollschläger; Anne-Katrin Hickmann
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-03-23       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Screening for depressed mood in patients with cancer using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory: investigation of a practical approach for the oncologist.

Authors:  Desiree Jones; Elisabeth G Vichaya; Charles S Cleeland; Lorenzo Cohen; Seema M Thekdi; Xin Shelley Wang; Michael J Fisch
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 3.840

4.  The clinical and cost effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy plus treatment as usual for the treatment of depression in advanced cancer (CanTalk): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Marc Serfaty; Michael King; Irwin Nazareth; Adrian Tookman; John Wood; Anna Gola; Trefor Aspden; Kathryn Mannix; Sarah Davis; Stirling Moorey; Louise Jones
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 2.279

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.