4.5 Article

Beside the Geriatric Depression Scale: the WHO-Five Well-being Index as a valid screening tool for depression in nursing homes

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
卷 28, 期 11, 页码 1197-1204

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gps.3944

关键词

depression; diagnosis; aged; nursing homes; ROC curve; sensitivity and specificity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to compare criterion validities of the WHO-Five Well-being Index (WHO-5) and the Geriatric Depression Scale 15-item version (GDS-15) and 4-item version (GDS-4) as screening instruments for depression in nursing home residents. MethodsData from 92 residents aged 65-97years without severe cognitive impairment (Mini Mental State Examination 15) were analysed. Criterion validities of the WHO-5, the GDS-15 and the GDS-4 were assessed against diagnoses of major and minor depression provided by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. Subanalyses were performed for major and minor depression. Areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs) as well as sensitivities and specificities at optimal cut-off points were computed. ResultsPrevalence of depressive disorder was 28.3%. The AUC value of the WHO-5 (0.90) was similar to that of the GDS-15 (0.82). Sensitivity of the WHO-5 (0.92) at its optimal cut-off of 12 was significantly higher than that of the GDS-15 (0.69) at its optimal cut-off of 7. The WHO-5 was equally sensitive for the subgroups of major and minor depression (0.92), whereas the GDS-15 was sensitive only for major depression (0.85), but not for minor depression (0.54). For specificity, there was no significant difference between WHO-5 (0.79) and GDS-15 (0.88), but both instruments outperformed the GDS-4 (0.53). ConclusionsThe WHO-5 demonstrated high sensitivity for major and minor depression. Being shorter than the GDS-15 and superior to the GDS-4, the WHO-5 is a promising screening tool that could help physicians improve low recognition rates of depression in nursing home residents. Copyright (c) 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据