Literature DB >> 27859868

Preferences of psychiatric practitioners for core symptoms of major depressive disorder: a hidden conjoint analysis.

Matthias W Riepe1, Peter Gritzmann2, Andreas Brieden3.   

Abstract

According to ICD-10 and DSM-V, symptoms of depressive disorder are considered to be equally important for severity judgment. It was the goal to investigate the weight of selected symptom complexes for severity judgment. In workaday life severity judgment results from an overall impression rather than from calculating severity in different symptom complexes, separately. In fact, the drivers for overall judgment may not be known explicitly to the psychiatrist himself. A method of choice to resolve this is conjoint analysis. Based on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Scale (MADRS) and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) case vignettes were constructed. Different symptom severity in the domains mood, vegetative symptoms, cognition/inhibition, suicidality, and everyday functioning were worked into the vignettes. Different symptom complexes influence the severity judgment by clinical psychiatrists to a rather different extent. Mood has a greater impact on severity judgment than suicidality, cognition/inhibition, vegetative symptoms, and everyday functioning. We conclude that core complexes of major depressive disorder are valued with different clinical relevance by psychiatrists. Thus, diagnosis and appraisal of therapeutic efficacy are subject to individual preferences of clinical psychiatrists and prevalence and therapeutic efficacy may be over- or under-estimated unless these differences in preferences are taken into account.
Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical relevance; clinical symptoms; disease severity; everyday function; symptom preferences

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27859868      PMCID: PMC6877254          DOI: 10.1002/mpr.1528

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res        ISSN: 1049-8931            Impact factor:   4.035


  22 in total

1.  A rating scale for depression.

Authors:  M HAMILTON
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1960-02       Impact factor: 10.154

2.  Integrating patients' views into health technology assessment: Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as a method to elicit patient preferences.

Authors:  Marion Danner; J Marjan Hummel; Fabian Volz; Jeannette G van Manen; Beate Wiegard; Charalabos-Markos Dintsios; Hilda Bastian; Andreas Gerber; Maarten J Ijzerman
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  Comparison of two multi-criteria decision techniques for eliciting treatment preferences in people with neurological disorders.

Authors:  Maarten J Ijzerman; Janine A van Til; Govert J Snoek
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  A comparison of analytic hierarchy process and conjoint analysis methods in assessing treatment alternatives for stroke rehabilitation.

Authors:  Maarten J Ijzerman; Janine A van Til; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Patient preferences for outcomes of depression treatment in Germany: a choice-based conjoint analysis study.

Authors:  Thomas M Zimmermann; Johannes Clouth; Michael Elosge; Matthias Heurich; Edith Schneider; Stefan Wilhelm; Anette Wolfrath
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 4.839

6.  An examination of DSM-IV depressive symptoms and risk for suicide completion in major depressive disorder: a psychological autopsy study.

Authors:  Alexander McGirr; Johanne Renaud; Monique Seguin; Martin Alda; Chawki Benkelfat; Alain Lesage; Gustavo Turecki
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2006-07-18       Impact factor: 4.839

7.  Using the analytic hierarchy process to elicit patient preferences: prioritizing multiple outcome measures of antidepressant drug treatment.

Authors:  Marjan J M Hummel; Fabian Volz; Jeannette G van Manen; Marion Danner; Charalabos-Markos Dintsios; Maarten J Ijzerman; Andreas Gerber
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

8.  Measuring depression: comparison and integration of three scales in the GENDEP study.

Authors:  R Uher; A Farmer; W Maier; M Rietschel; J Hauser; A Marusic; O Mors; A Elkin; R J Williamson; C Schmael; N Henigsberg; J Perez; J Mendlewicz; J G E Janzing; A Zobel; M Skibinska; D Kozel; A S Stamp; M Bajs; A Placentino; M Barreto; P McGuffin; K J Aitchison
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2007-10-09       Impact factor: 7.723

9.  The symptoms of major depression.

Authors:  A M Buchwald; D Rudick-Davis
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  1993-05

10.  The four principles: can they be measured and do they predict ethical decision making?

Authors:  Katie Page
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2012-05-20       Impact factor: 2.652

View more
  2 in total

1.  Preferences of psychiatric practitioners for core symptoms of major depressive disorder: a hidden conjoint analysis.

Authors:  Matthias W Riepe; Peter Gritzmann; Andreas Brieden
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2016-11-09       Impact factor: 4.035

Review 2.  Mental health service preferences of patients and providers: a scoping review of conjoint analysis and discrete choice experiments from global public health literature over the last 20 years (1999-2019).

Authors:  Anna Larsen; Albert Tele; Manasi Kumar
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 2.655

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.