Cited by 163Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingMental Health Research Topics

Evidence‐based guidelines for interpretation of the Panic Disorder Severity Scale

Open access
Furukawa, Toshi A., Katherine Shear, M., Barlow, David H., Gorman, Jack M., Woods, Scott W., Money, Roy, Etschel, Eva, Engel, Rolf R. +1 more·2009·Depression and Anxiety

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) is promising to be a standard global rating scale for panic disorder. In order for a clinical scale to be useful, we need a guideline for interpreting its scores and their changes, and for defining clinical change points such as response and remission. METHODS: We used individual patient data from two large randomized controlled trials of panic disorder (total n=568). Study participants were administered the PDSS and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI)--Severity and --Improvement. We applied equipercentile linking technique to draw correspondences between PDSS and CGI-Severity, numeric changes in PDSS and CGI-Improvement, and percent changes in PDSS and CGI-Improvement. RESULTS: The interpretation of the PDSS total score differed according to the presence or absence of agoraphobia. When the patients were not agoraphobic, score ranges 0-1 corresponded with "Normal," 2-5 with "Borderline," 6-9 with "Slightly ill," 10-13 with "Moderately ill," and 14 and above with "Markedly ill." When the patients were agoraphobic, score ranges 3-7 meant "Borderline ill," 8-10 "Slightly ill," 11-15 "Moderately ill," and 16 and above "Markedly ill." The relationship between PDSS change and CGI-Improvement was more linear when measured as percentile change than as numeric changes, and was indistinguishable for those with or without agoraphobia. The decrease by 75-100% was considered "Very much improved," that by 40-74% "Much improved," and that by 10-39% "Minimally improved." CONCLUSION: We propose that "remission" of panic disorder be defined by PDSS scores of five or less and its "response" by 40% or greater reduction.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/da.20532

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [13]Furukawa TA Strauss S Bucher HC Guyatt G Drummond R Meade MO Diagnostic Tests Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature: Essentials of Evidence-Based Practice 2 New York The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc 2008 195 222

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Furukawa, T. A., Katherine Shear, M., Barlow, D. H., Gorman, J. M., Woods, S. W., Money, R., Etschel, E., Engel, R. R., & Leucht, S.
Affiliations
  • Nagoya City University (JP)
  • Columbia University School of Social Work, New York, New York
  • Boston University (US)
  • Comprehensive NeuroScience, Inc., White Plains, New York
  • Yale University (US)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
Corresponding author
Furukawa, Toshi A.
Venue
Depression and Anxiety
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-11-12
Volume
26
Issue
10
Pages
922-929
ISSN
  • 1091-4269 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6394
OpenAlex
W1995409814
Cited by
163
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 11
FWCI
2.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Depression and Anxiety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • mediaTUM (Technical University of Munich) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH045966, R10MH045963, R01MH045963, MH045965, MH045966, R01MH045965, MH045964, R10MH045965, R01MH045964, MH045963)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
Panic Disorder Severity Scale, panic disorder, agoraphobia, Clinical Global Impression Scale, severity rating, equipercentile linking, score interpretation, individual patient data
MeSH terms
Adult, Agoraphobia, Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic, Combined Modality Therapy, Female, Humans, Imipramine, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Assessment, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Panic Disorder, Treatment Outcome, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review