Cited by 115Mental Health Treatment and AccessMental Health Research TopicsSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse

Indicators of mental disorders in UK Biobank—A comparison of approaches

Open access
Davis, Katrina A.S., Cullen, Breda, Adams, Mark, Brailean, Anamaria, Breen, Gerome, Coleman, Jonathan R.I., Dregan, Alexandru, Gaspar, Héléna A. +6 more·2019·International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research

Abstract

Objectives: For many research cohorts, it is not practical to provide a “gold‐standard” mental health diagnosis. It is therefore important for mental health research that potential alternative measures for ascertaining mental disorder status are understood. Methods: Data from UK Biobank in those participants who had completed the online Mental Health Questionnaire (n = 157,363) were used to compare the classification of mental disorder by four methods: symptom‐based outcome (self‐complete based on diagnostic interviews), self‐reported diagnosis, hospital data linkage, and self‐report medication. Results: Participants self‐reporting any psychiatric diagnosis had elevated risk of any symptom‐based outcome. Cohen's κ between self‐reported diagnosis and symptom‐based outcome was 0.46 for depression, 0.28 for bipolar affective disorder, and 0.24 for anxiety. There were small numbers of participants uniquely identified by hospital data linkage and medication. Conclusion: Our results confirm that ascertainment of mental disorder diagnosis in large cohorts such as UK Biobank is complex. There may not be one method of classification that is right for all circumstances, but an informed and transparent use of outcome measure(s) to suit each research question will maximise the potential of UK Biobank and other resources for mental health research.

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/mpr.1796

Cites

57 of 57 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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. McDowell, I. (2006). Anxiety & depression In Measuring health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires (pp. 273– 393). New York: Oxford University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davis, K. A. S., Cullen, B., Adams, M., Brailean, A., Breen, G., Coleman, J. R. I., Dregan, A., Gaspar, H. A., Hübel, C., Lee, W., McIntosh, A. M., Nolan, J., Pearsall, R., & Hotopf, M.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Gartnavel General Hospital (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience King's College London London UK
  • Devon Partnership NHS Trust (GB)
  • UK Biobank (GB)
Corresponding author
Davis, Katrina A.S.
Venue
International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-08-08
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
e1796-e1796
ISSN
  • 1049-8931 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-0657
OpenAlex
W2968083538
Cited by
111
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 11 · 2018: 1
FWCI
18.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health Research
  • Dr. Mortimer and Theresa Sackler Foundation
  • Maudsley Charity (980)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Keywords
psychiatric diagnosis, UK Biobank, mental health questionnaire, hospital data linkage, antidepressants, depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety, diagnostic classification
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Cohort Studies, Databases, Factual, Medical Records Systems, Computerized, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Self Report, Datasets as Topic

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