4.5 Article

Validation of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for depression screening among chinese Americans

Journal

COMPREHENSIVE PSYCHIATRY
Volume 49, Issue 2, Pages 211-217

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2006.06.002

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [K23 MH067085, K23 MH067085-05, MH67085-01A1] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The objective of this study was to validate the Chinese Bilingual version of the Patient Health Questionnaire (CB-PHQ-9) for screening for depression among Chinese Americans in primary care. Method: Chinese-American patients attending a primary care clinic were screened for major depressive disorder (MDD) using the CB-PHQ-9. All patients who scored 15 or higher on the CB-PHQ-9 were interviewed using the Chinese-bilingual Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, patient version. Eight percent of patients who scored less than 15 on the CB-PHQ-9 were randomly selected and interviewed with the depression module of the Chinese-bilingual Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, patient version. Results: During the study, 1940 unduplicated patients completed the CB-PHQ-9. The CB-PHQ-9 had high internal consistency (alpha = 0.91), and the scores of each of its 9 items had moderate to moderately high correlations (0.52-0.85) with the total scores. The sensitivity and specificity of the CB-PHQ-9 for recognizing MDD were found to be 81% and 98%, respectively, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was estimated to be 0.97 (SE, 0.01). Conclusion: The CB-PHQ-9 is a valid and useful instrument for screening for MDD among Chinese Americans in primary care. (c) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available