OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the performance characteristics and validity of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Item (PHQ-9) as a screening tool for depression among adolescents. METHODS: The PHQ-9 was completed by 442 youth (aged 13-17 years) who were enrolled in a large health care-delivery system and participated in a study on depression outcomes. Criterion validity and performance characteristics were assessed against an independent structured mental health interview (the Child Diagnostic Interview Schedule [DISC-IV]). Construct validity was tested by examining associations between the PHQ-9 and a self-report measure of functional impairment, as well as parental reports of child psychosocial impairment and internalizing symptoms. RESULTS: A PHQ-9 score of 11 or more had a sensitivity of 89.5% and a specificity of 77.5% for detecting youth who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria for major depression on the DISC-IV. Receiver-operator-curve analysis revealed that the PHQ-9 had an area under the curve of 0.88 (95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.94), and the cut point of 11 was optimal for maximizing sensitivity without loss of specificity. Increasing PHQ-9 scores were significantly correlated with increasing levels of functional impairment, as well as parental report of internalizing symptoms and psychosocial problems. CONCLUSIONS: Although the optimal cut point is higher among adolescents, the sensitivity and specificity of the PHQ-9 are similar to those of adult populations. The brief nature and ease of scoring of this instrument make this tool an excellent choice for providers and researchers seeking to implement depression screening in primary care settings.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the performance characteristics and validity of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Item (PHQ-9) as a screening tool for depression among adolescents. METHODS: The PHQ-9 was completed by 442 youth (aged 13-17 years) who were enrolled in a large health care-delivery system and participated in a study on depression outcomes. Criterion validity and performance characteristics were assessed against an independent structured mental health interview (the Child Diagnostic Interview Schedule [DISC-IV]). Construct validity was tested by examining associations between the PHQ-9 and a self-report measure of functional impairment, as well as parental reports of childpsychosocial impairment and internalizing symptoms. RESULTS: A PHQ-9 score of 11 or more had a sensitivity of 89.5% and a specificity of 77.5% for detecting youth who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria for major depression on the DISC-IV. Receiver-operator-curve analysis revealed that the PHQ-9 had an area under the curve of 0.88 (95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.94), and the cut point of 11 was optimal for maximizing sensitivity without loss of specificity. Increasing PHQ-9 scores were significantly correlated with increasing levels of functional impairment, as well as parental report of internalizing symptoms and psychosocial problems. CONCLUSIONS: Although the optimal cut point is higher among adolescents, the sensitivity and specificity of the PHQ-9 are similar to those of adult populations. The brief nature and ease of scoring of this instrument make this tool an excellent choice for providers and researchers seeking to implement depression screening in primary care settings.
Authors: Laura P Richardson; Carol Rockhill; Joan E Russo; David C Grossman; Julie Richards; Carolyn McCarty; Elizabeth McCauley; Wayne Katon Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2010-04-05 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Shelagh A Mulvaney; Constance A Mara; Jessica C Kichler; Shideh Majidi; Kimberly A Driscoll; Sarah C Westen; Alana Rawlinson; Laura M Jacobsen; Rebecca N Adams; Korey K Hood; Maureen Monaghan Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Aaron R Lyon; Kristy Ludwig; Jessica Knaster Wasse; Alex Bergstrom; Ethan Hendrix; Elizabeth McCauley Journal: Adm Policy Ment Health Date: 2016-01
Authors: Aaron R Lyon; Eric J Bruns; Kristy Ludwig; Ann Vander Stoep; Michael D Pullmann; Shannon Dorsey; John Eaton; Ethan Hendrix; Elizabeth McCauley Journal: School Ment Health Date: 2015-07-30
Authors: Keeley J Pratt; Angela L Lamson; Melvin S Swanson; Suzanne Lazorick; David N Collier Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2011-10-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Laura P Richardson; Evette Ludman; Elizabeth McCauley; Jeff Lindenbaum; Cindy Larison; Chuan Zhou; Greg Clarke; David Brent; Wayne Katon Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-08-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: R Eric Lewandowski; Mary C Acri; Kimberly E Hoagwood; Mark Olfson; Greg Clarke; William Gardner; Sarah Hudson Scholle; Sepheen Byron; Kelly Kelleher; Harold A Pincus; Samantha Frank; Sarah M Horwitz Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2013-09-16 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Auden C McClure; Mike Stoolmiller; Susanne E Tanski; Rutger C M E Engels; James D Sargent Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2012-12-19 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Denise E Wilfley; Ellen E Fitzsimmons-Craft; Dawn M Eichen; Dorothy J Van Buren; R Robinson Welch; Athena H Robinson; Booil Jo; Ramesh Raghavan; Enola K Proctor; G Terence Wilson; W Stewart Agras Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-07-06 Impact factor: 2.226