The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Detecting common mental disorders in primary care in India: a comparison of five screening questionnaires
Open accessAbstract
Background: Screening of patients for common mental disorders (CMDs) is needed in primary-care management programmes. This study aimed to compare the screening properties of five widely used questionnaires. Method: Adult attenders in five primary-care settings in India were recruited through systematic sampling. Four questionnaires were administered, in pairs, in random order to participants: the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ, 12 items); the Primary Health Questionnaire (PHQ, nine items); the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10, 10 items), and from which we could extract the score of the shorter 6-item K6; and the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ, 20 items). All participants were interviewed with a structured lay diagnostic interview, the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R). Results: Complete data were available for 598 participants (participation rate 99.3%). All five questionnaires showed moderate to high discriminating ability; the GHQ and SRQ showed the best results. All five showed moderate to high degrees of correlation with one another, the poorest being between the two shortest questionnaires, K6 and PHQ. All five had relatively good internal consistency. However, the positive predictive value (PPV) of the questionnaires compared with the diagnostic interview ranged from 51% to 77% at the optimal cut-off scores. Conclusions: There is little difference in the ability of these questionnaires to identify cases accurately, but none showed high PPVs without a considerable compromise on sensitivity. Hence, the choice of an optimum cut-off score that yields the best balance between sensitivity and PPV may need to be tailored to individual settings, with a higher cut-off being recommended in resource-limited primary-care settings.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The PHQ has previously been validated among South Asian populations and used in previous studies measuring the prevalence of depressive symptoms among various communities in India.15–19”
From Mental Health, Suicidality, Health, and Social Indicators Among College Students Across Nine States in India (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
KESSLER, R. C., ANDREWS, G., COLPE, L. J., HIRIPI, E., MROCZEK, D. K., NORMAND, S.-L. T., WALTERS, E. E., & ZASLAVSKY, A. M. (2002) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291702006074 · Cited by 10,327
Spitzer, R. L. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.18.1737 · Cited by 9,802
Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine
ZWEIG, M. H., & Campbell, G. (1993) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1093/clinchem/39.4.561 · Cited by 6,595
(1988) · NFER-Nelson eBooks · Cited by 5,560
Kushner (2021) · doi:10.12788/jfp · Cited by 3,799
Interpreting scores on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10)
Andrews, G., & Slade, T. (2001) · Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1111/j.1467-842x.2001.tb00310.x · Cited by 2,021
FURUKAWA, T. A., KESSLER, R. C., SLADE, T., & ANDREWS, G. (2003) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291702006700 · Cited by 1,570
Lewis, G., Pelosi, A. J., Araya, R., & Dunn, G. (1992) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291700030415 · Cited by 1,487
Self-citationHarding, T. W., De Arango, V., Baltazar, J., Climent, C. E., Ibrahim, H. H. A., Ladrido-Ignacio, L., & Wig, N. N. (1980) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291700043993 · Cited by 1,037
Wittchen, H.-U., Robins, L. N., Cottler, L. B., Sartorius, N., Burke, J. D., Regier, D., & Trials, P. I. T. M. W. F. (1991) · British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.159.5.645 · Cited by 833
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Goldberg, 1992, Common Mental Disorders: A Biosocial Model
- Gerrity, 1999, Journal of Family Practice, 48, 949
- Gautam, 1987, Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 29, 63
- Shamasundar, 1986, Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 28, 217
- Patel, 1999, NIMHANS Journal, 17, 307
- none, 2004, Depression: Management of Depression in Primary and Secondary Care
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., & Löwe, B. (2010) · General Hospital Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2010.03.006 · Cited by 4,057
Manea, L., Gilbody, S., & McMillan, D. (2012) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.110829 · Cited by 1,966
Plummer, F., Manea, L., Trepel, D., & McMillan, D. (2016) · General Hospital Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2015.11.005 · Cited by 1,882
Kessler, R. C., Green, J. G., Gruber, M. J., Sampson, N. A., Bromet, E., Cuitan, M., Furukawa, T. A., Gureje, O., Hinkov, H., Hu, C., et al. (2010) · International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1002/mpr.310 · Cited by 1,434
Poverty, depression, and anxiety: Causal evidence and mechanisms
Ridley, M., Rao, G., Schilbach, F., & Patel, V. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aay0214 · Cited by 1,220
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Patel, V., Araya, R., Chowdhary, N., King, M., Kirkwood, B., Nayak, S., Simon, G., & Weiss, H. A.
- Affiliations
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
- University of Bristol (GB)
- Sangath (IN)
- The Royal Free Hospital (GB)
- Group Health Cooperative (US)
- Corresponding author
- Patel, V.
- Venue
- Psychological Medicine
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2007-11-30
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 221-228
- ISSN
- 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8978
- PMC
- PMC4959557
- OpenAlex
- W2114480195
- Cited by
- 364
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 12.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust (076783)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- common mental disorders, mental health screening, screening questionnaire, primary care, General Health Questionnaire, Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, Self-Reporting Questionnaire, positive predictive value, sensitivity, cut-off values, resource-limited settings, India
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, India, Interview, Psychological, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Prevalence
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
