Cited by 33Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Dichotomizing rating scale scores in psychiatry: a bad idea?

Open access
Purgato, M., Barbui, C.·2013·Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences

Abstract

In psychiatry, the use of rating scales as measures of outcome in clinical trials allows us to generate continuous outcome data, where each individual's outcome is measured in numbers. Continuous outcomes can be divided into two categories, such as improved and not improved, or may be kept continuous. This article briefly presents the main advantages and disadvantages of these two approaches, which are commonly employed in the analyses of rating scale scores in clinical trials and systematic reviews.

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 · 10.1017/s2045796012000613

Cites

6 of 6 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Purgato, M., & Barbui, C.
Affiliations
University of Verona (IT)
Corresponding author
Purgato, M.
Venue
Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences
Published
2012-10-23
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
17-19
ISSN
  • 2045-7960 (ISSN-L)
  • 2045-7979
OpenAlex
W2328803923
Cited by
33
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
dichotomization, continuous outcomes, clinical trials, treatment response, systematic reviews
MeSH terms
Humans, Psychiatry

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