Cited by 77Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingHealth Education and Validation

Screening for psychological distress using the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS): Initial validation of structural validity in dialysis patients

Chilcot, Joseph, Hudson, Joanna L., Moss-Morris, Rona, Carroll, Amy, Game, David, Simpson, Anna, Hotopf, Matthew·2018·General Hospital Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective To validate the factor structure of the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS)- which is a composite measure of depression and anxiety using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Generalised Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), in a sample of haemodialysis patients. Method Screening data (n=182) used to select entry into a feasibility study of an online cognitive-behavioural therapy intervention for distress in dialysis patients were analysed here. Structural validity of the PHQ-ADS was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), assessing alternative models including a bi-factor model. In the bi-factor model all items from the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 (16-items in total) were loaded onto a general distress factor. Respective items of the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 were specified as subgroup factors. Omega-hierarchical was calculated to indicate the level of saturation of a multidimensional scale by a general factor. Construct validity was determined against the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. Results A bi-factor PHQ-ADS model had good fit to the data (chi-square=96.1, p=0.26, CFI=0.99; TLI=0.99; RMSEA=0.02). The general distress factor accounted for approximately 84% of the explained variance (omega-h=0.90). Distress scores were significantly higher in females compare with males. There was a significant association between distress and negative illness perceptions (r=0.58, p Conclusions The PHQ-ADS appears to have good structural validity in ha…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2017.09.007

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chilcot, J., Hudson, J. L., Moss-Morris, R., Carroll, A., Game, D., Simpson, A., & Hotopf, M.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Chilcot, Joseph
Venue
General Hospital Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-01
Volume
50
Pages
15-19
ISSN
0163-8343 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2757569404
Cited by
77
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 4 · 2013: 1
FWCI
6.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • General Hospital Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Menzies Centre for Australian Studies, King's College London, University of London
  • National Institute for Health Research
  • South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
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 › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
psychological distress, hemodialysis patients, structural validity, bifactor model, depression screening, anxiety screening, illness perception, cognitive behavioral therapy, end-stage renal disease
MeSH terms
Patient Health Questionnaire, Adult, Aged, Anxiety Disorders, Depressive Disorder, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Renal Dialysis, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Stress, Psychological, Reproducibility of Results, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

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