There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
The 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) is an ultra-brief self-report questionnaire that consists of a 2-item depression scale (PHQ-2) and a 2-item anxiety scale (GAD-2). Given that PHQ-4, PHQ-2, and GAD-2 have not been validated in the general population, this study aimed to investigate their reliability and validity in a large general population sample and to generate normative data. A nationally representative face-to-face household survey was conducted in Germany in 2006. The survey questionnaire consisted of the PHQ-4, other self-report instruments, and demographic characteristics. Of the 5030 participants (response rate=72.9%), 53.6% were female and mean (SD) age was 48.4 (18.0) years. The sociodemographic characteristics of the study sample closely match those of the total populations in Germany as well as those in the United States. Confirmatory factor analyses showed very good fit indices for a two-factor solution (RMSEA .027; 90% CI .023-.032). All models tested were structurally invariant between different age and gender groups. Construct validity of the PHQ-4, PHQ-2, and GAD-2 was supported by intercorrelations with other self-report scales and with demographic risk factors for depression and anxiety. PHQ-2 and GAD-2 scores of 3 corresponded to percentile ranks of 93.4% and 95.2%, respectively, whereas PHQ-2 and GAD-2 scores of 5 corresponded to percentile ranks of 99.0% and 99.2%, respectively. A criterion standard diagnostic interview for depression and anxiety was not included. Results from this study support the reliability and validity of the PHQ-4, PHQ-2, and GAD-2 as ultra-brief measures of depression and anxiety in the general population. The normative data provided in this study can be used to compare a subject's scale score with those determined from a general population reference group. Copyright 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
The purpose of this study was to describe the development of the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), a new instrument for the assessment of diabetes-related emotional distress, based on four independent patient samples. In consultation with patients and professionals from multiple disciplines, a preliminary scale of 28 items was developed, based a priori on four distress-related domains: emotional burden subscale, physician-related distress subscale, regimen-related distress subscale, and diabetes-related interpersonal distress. The new instrument was included in a larger battery of questionnaires used in diabetes studies at four diverse sites: waiting room at a primary care clinic (n = 200), waiting room at a diabetes specialty clinic (n = 179), a diabetes management study program (n = 167), and an ongoing diabetes management program (n = 158). Exploratory factor analyses revealed four factors consistent across sites (involving 17 of the 28 items) that matched the critical content domains identified earlier. The correlation between the 28-item and 17-item scales was very high (r = 0.99). The mean correlation between the 17-item total score (DDS) and the four subscales was high (r = 0.82), but the pattern of interscale correlations suggested that the subscales, although not totally independent, tapped into relatively different areas of diabetes-related distress. Internal reliability of the DDS and the four subscales was adequate (alpha > 0.87), and validity coefficients yielded significant linkages with the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, meal planning, exercise, and total cholesterol. Insulin users evidenced the highest mean DDS total scores, whereas diet-controlled subjects displayed the lowest scores (P < 0.001). The DDS has a consistent, generalizable factor structure and good internal reliability and validity across four different clinical sites. The new instrument may serve as a valuable measure of diabetes-related emotional distress for use in research and clinical practice.
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.