Thomas D Meyer1, Julia Schrader2, Matthew Ridley3, Claudia Lex4. 1. Newcastle University, Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. Electronic address: thomas.meyer@newcastle.ac.uk. 2. Newcastle University, Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Department of Psychology, Eberhard Karls University, Tübingen, Germany. 3. Newcastle University, Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, UK. 4. Villach General Hospital, Department of Psychiatry, Austria.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Bipolar disorders (BDs) are often not recognised with potentially drastic consequences for the individuals and their families. In clinical practice self-reports can be used to screen to enhance recognition. We therefore present a systematic review of the screening properties for the Hypomania Checklist (HCL-32). METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify all relevant studies looking at the screening properties of the HCL-32 in adults. RESULTS: Out of 196 papers 21 papers reported data on 22 independent samples. We narratively reviewed these studies. Weighted estimated Sensitivity was 80% regardless of whether a BD diagnosis was compared to unipolar depression or any other non-bipolar diagnosis. Specificity indicated that the HCL-32 was better when comparing BD to unipolar depression (65.3%) than to any other diagnostic category (57.3%). Fewer studies provided estimates for predictive powers, leading to less reliable overall estimates for these indicators. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some limitations, using the HCL-32 as a first screening in patients seeking help for depression can be recommended, but should never be used on its own for diagnosing. Future research should examine whether screening properties can be improved by developing an algorithm incorporating the negative consequences reported for different areas in the HCL-32.
OBJECTIVE:Bipolar disorders (BDs) are often not recognised with potentially drastic consequences for the individuals and their families. In clinical practice self-reports can be used to screen to enhance recognition. We therefore present a systematic review of the screening properties for the Hypomania Checklist (HCL-32). METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify all relevant studies looking at the screening properties of the HCL-32 in adults. RESULTS: Out of 196 papers 21 papers reported data on 22 independent samples. We narratively reviewed these studies. Weighted estimated Sensitivity was 80% regardless of whether a BD diagnosis was compared to unipolar depression or any other non-bipolar diagnosis. Specificity indicated that the HCL-32 was better when comparing BD to unipolar depression (65.3%) than to any other diagnostic category (57.3%). Fewer studies provided estimates for predictive powers, leading to less reliable overall estimates for these indicators. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some limitations, using the HCL-32 as a first screening in patients seeking help for depression can be recommended, but should never be used on its own for diagnosing. Future research should examine whether screening properties can be improved by developing an algorithm incorporating the negative consequences reported for different areas in the HCL-32.
Authors: J F Hayes; G M Khandaker; J Anderson; D Mackay; S Zammit; G Lewis; D J Smith; D P J Osborn Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2016-08-01 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: Leila Jahangard; Anahita Rahmani; Mohammad Haghighi; Mohammad Ahmadpanah; Dena Sadeghi Bahmani; Ali R Soltanian; Shahriar Shirzadi; Hafez Bajoghli; Markus Gerber; Edith Holsboer-Trachsler; Serge Brand Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2017-12-12
Authors: Alexander Richards; John Horwood; Joseph Boden; Martin Kennedy; Ruth Sellers; Lucy Riglin; Sumit Mistry; Hannah Jones; Daniel J Smith; Stanley Zammit; Michael Owen; Michael C O'Donovan; Gordon T Harold Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2018-11-26 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: Jana J Anderson; Sean Hoath; Stanley Zammit; Thomas D Meyer; Jill P Pell; Daniel Mackay; Daniel J Smith Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2016-04-26 Impact factor: 4.839