4.6 Article

Do Somatic and Cognitive Symptoms of Traumatic Brain Injury Confound Depression Screening?

期刊

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.12.008

关键词

Brain injuries; Depression; Diagnosis; Psychometrics; Rehabilitation

资金

  1. Department of Education (National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research) [H133B080024]
  2. National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research
  3. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  4. National Institutes of Health [R01 HD39415]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To evaluate whether items of the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) function differently in persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI) than in persons from a primary care sample. Design: This study was a retrospective analysis of responses to the PHQ-9 collected in 2 previous studies. Responses to the PHQ-9 were modeled using item response theory, and the presence of DIF was evaluated using ordinal logistic regression. Setting: Eight primary care sites and a single trauma center in Washington state. Participants: Participants (N=3365) were persons from 8 primary care sites (n=3000) and a consecutive sample of persons with complicated mild to severe TBI from a trauma center who were 1 year postinjury (n=365). Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure: PHQ-9. Results: No PHQ-9 item demonstrated statistically significant or meaningful DIF attributable to TBI. A sensitivity analysis failed to show that the cumulative effects of nonsignificant DIF resulted in a systematic inflation of PHQ-9 total scores. Therefore, the results also do not support the hypothesis that cumulative DIF for PHQ-9 items spuriously inflates the numbers of persons with TBI screened as potentially having major depressive disorder. Conclusions: The PHQ-9 is a valid screener of major depressive disorder in people with complicated mild to severe TB!, and all symptoms can be counted toward the diagnosis of major depressive disorder without special concern about over-diagnosis or unnecessary treatment.

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

4.6
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