↓ Skip to main content

Utility of Washington Early Recognition Center Self-Report Screening Questionnaires in the Assessment of Patients with Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Utility of Washington Early Recognition Center Self-Report Screening Questionnaires in the Assessment of Patients with Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00149
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christina J. Hsieh, Douglass Godwin, Daniel Mamah

Abstract

Early identification and treatment are associated with improved outcomes in bipolar disorder (BPD) and schizophrenia (SCZ). Screening for the presence of these disorders usually involves time-intensive interviews that may not be practical in settings where mental health providers are limited. Thus, individuals at earlier stages of illness are often not identified. The Washington Early Recognition Center Affectivity and Psychosis (WERCAP) screen is a self-report questionnaire originally developed to identify clinical risk for developing bipolar or psychotic disorders. The goal of the current study was to investigate the utility of the WERCAP Screen and two complementary questionnaires, the WERC Stress Screen and the WERC Substance Screen, in identifying individuals with established SCZ or BPD. Participants consisted of 35 BPD and 34 SCZ patients, as well as 32 controls (CON), aged 18-30 years. Univariate analyses were used to test for score differences between groups. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to identify diagnostic predictors. Significant group differences were found for the psychosis section of the WERCAP (pWERCAP; p < 0.001), affective section of the WERCAP (aWERCAP; p = 0.001), and stress severity (p = 0.027). No significant group differences were found in the rates of substance use as measured by the WERC Substance Screen (p = 0.267). Only the aWERCAP and pWERCAP scores were useful predictors of diagnostic category. ROC curve analysis showed the optimal cut point on the aWERCAP to identify BPD among our participant groups was a score of >20 [area under the curve (AUC): 0.87; sensitivity: 0.91; specificity: 0.71], while that for the pWERCAP to identify SCZ was a score of >13 (AUC: 0.89; sensitivity: 0.88; specificity: 0.82). These results indicate that the WERCAP Screen may be useful in screening individuals for BPD and SCZ and that identifying stress and substance-use severity can be rapidly done using self-report questionnaires. Larger studies in undiagnosed individuals will be needed to test the WERCAP Screen's ability to identify mania or psychosis in the community.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 17%
Student > Master 5 11%
Researcher 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 21 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Psychology 7 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Mathematics 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 22 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,858,374
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#5,075
of 10,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,042
of 338,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#32
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,042 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 338,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.