| Title |
Do measures of depressive symptoms function differently in people with spinal cord injury versus primary care patients: the CES-D, PHQ-9, and PROMIS®-D
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality of Life Research, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11136-016-1363-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karon F. Cook, Michael A. Kallen, Charles Bombardier, Alyssa M. Bamer, Seung W. Choi, Jiseon Kim, Rana Salem, Dagmar Amtmann |
| Abstract |
To evaluate whether items of three measures of depressive symptoms function differently in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) than in persons from a primary care sample. This study was a retrospective analysis of responses to the Patient Health Questionnaire depression scale, the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale, and the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS(®)) version 1.0 eight-item depression short form 8b (PROMIS-D). The presence of differential item function (DIF) was evaluated using ordinal logistic regression. No items of any of the three target measures were flagged for DIF based on standard criteria. In a follow-up sensitivity analyses, the criterion was changed to make the analysis more sensitive to potential DIF. Scores were corrected for DIF flagged under this criterion. Minimal differences were found between the original scores and those corrected for DIF under the sensitivity criterion. The three depression screening measures evaluated in this study did not perform differently in samples of individuals with SCI compared to general and community samples. Transdiagnostic symptoms did not appear to spuriously inflate depression severity estimates when administered to people with SCI. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 27% |
| Unknown | 13 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 14% |
| Psychology | 9 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 15 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,380,162
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#1,684
of 2,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,003
of 355,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#45
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,850 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 355,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.