Cited by 100Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and AccessPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Validation of the nine‐item P atient H ealth Q uestionnaire to screen for major depression in a C hinese primary care population

Chen, Shulin, Fang, Yu, Chiu, Helen, Fan, Hainan, Jin, Tao, Conwell, Yeates·2013·Asia-Pacific Psychiatry

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) for screening depression in Chinese primary care settings. METHODS: In 100 randomly selected primary care clinics (PCC) of Hangzhou city, we recruited 2,639 patients (aged ≥18 years) and applied the PHQ-9 to screen for depression. Then, 280 of them were further interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Disorders (SCID) for the diagnosis of major depression. Statistical analysis of the demographic data, reliability, validity and receiver-operator curve were performed. RESULTS: The mean administration time was 7 minutes, and the Cronbach's α was 0.89. The optimal cutoff score of 10 on the PHQ-9 revealed a sensitivity of 0.87, specificity of 0.81, and positive likelihood ratio of 5.04. The area under the receiver-operator curve in this study was 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.87-0.94). DISCUSSION: The PHQ-9 performs well and has acceptable psychometric properties for screening of patients with depression in a Chinese primary care population.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/appy.12063

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 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
Chen, S., Fang, Y., Chiu, H., Fan, H., Jin, T., & Conwell, Y.
Affiliations
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
  • Anhui Medical University (CN)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Health Department of Shangcheng District Hangzhou City Hangzhou China
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Chen, Shulin
Venue
Asia-Pacific Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-03-27
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
61-68
ISSN
  • 1758-5864 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-5872
OpenAlex
W1868754566
Cited by
100
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
4.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Asia-Pacific Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
  • Fogarty International Center (R01TW008699)
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
PHQ-9, Patient Health Questionnaire, major depressive disorder, depression screening, primary care, Chinese patients, psychometric validation, screening cut-off values, sensitivity and specificity, severe combined immunodeficiency
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, China, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, ROC Curve, Young Adult

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