Cited by 39Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and AccessPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

The performance and accuracy of depression screening tools capable of self-administration in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Miller, Peter, Newby, David, Walkom, Emily, Schneider, Jenny, Li, Shu Chuen, Evans, Tiffany-Jane·2021·The European Journal of Psychiatry

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejpsy.2020.10.002

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miller, P., Newby, D., Walkom, E., Schneider, J., Li, S. C., & Evans, T.-J.
Affiliations
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
  • Calvary Mater Newcastle Hospital (AU)
  • Hunter Medical Research Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Newby, David
Venue
The European Journal of Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-01
Volume
35
Issue
1
Pages
1-18
ISSN
0213-6163 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3109107746
Cited by
39
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2
FWCI
0.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The European Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
depression screening, primary care, PHQ-9, WHO-5, psychometric properties, diagnostic accuracy, diagnostic odds ratio, screening tool comparison, USPSTF recommendations

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