Cited by 268Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Research Topics

Validity of the shortened Mood and Feelings Questionnaire in a community sample of children and adolescents: A preliminary research note

Open access
Thapar, Anita, McGuffin, Peter·1998·Psychiatry Research

Abstract

The Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ) was designed to detect clinical depression in children and adolescents. Our aim was to investigate the relationship between symptom scores obtained using the short-version MFQ and psychiatric disorders in a non-clinical sample. Seventy-eight parents and 71 twins, who had completed the MFQ, were interviewed separately using a semistructured diagnostic interview, the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment. Parent-rated MFQ scores (MFQ-P) were found to distinguish those with ICD-10 (point biserial correlation = 0.345) and DSM-III-R depression (point biserial correlation = 0.369) from non-depressed cases. MFQ-P scores also differentiated depressed cases from those with 'other psychiatric diagnoses' (any anxiety disorder, oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder, hyperkinetic disorder/attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and adjustment disorder/post-traumatic disorder). The MFQ-P at the chosen cut-off point showed a sensitivity of 0.75 and specificity of 0.73 for an ICD-10 diagnosis of depression and a sensitivity of 0.86 and specificity of 0.87 for DSM-III-R depression. The number of self-rated reports (MFQ-C) was small, but overall the results suggest that self-rated MFQ scores may show less specificity. The MFQ-C at the selected cut-off point showed a sensitivity of 0.6 and specificity of 0.61 for ICD-10 depression, and a sensitivity of 0.75 and specificity of 0.74 for DSM-III-R depression.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0165-1781(98)00073-0

Cites

21 of 21 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thapar, A., & McGuffin, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Thapar, Anita
Venue
Psychiatry Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-11
Volume
81
Issue
2
Pages
259-268
ISSN
0165-1781 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2095963507
Cited by
268
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 7
FWCI
0.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
University of Manchester
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
Mood and Feelings Questionnaire, depression screening, children and adolescents, questionnaire validity, sensitivity and specificity, psychiatric comorbidity, anxiety disorders, conduct disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, twins
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Affect, Child, Child Behavior Disorders, Depressive Disorder, Emotions, Female, Humans, Male, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics, Sampling Studies, Reproducibility of Results, Comorbidity

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