Cited by 200Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesDiabetes Management and EducationMental Health Treatment and Access

Validation of the PHQ-9 as a screening instrument for depression in diabetes patients in specialized outpatient clinics

Open access
van Steenbergen-Weijenburg, Kirsten M, de Vroege, Lars, Ploeger, Robert R, Brals, Jan W, Vloedbeld, Martijn G, Veneman, Thiemo F, Hakkaart-van Roijen, Leona, Rutten, Frans FH +2 more·2010·BMC Health Services Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For the treatment of depression in diabetes patients, it is important that depression is recognized at an early stage. A screening method for depression is the patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9). The aim of this study is to validate the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) as a screening instrument for depression in diabetes patients in outpatient clinics. METHODS: 197 diabetes patients from outpatient clinics in the Netherlands filled in the PHQ-9. Within 2 weeks they were approached for an interview with the Mini Neuropsychiatric Interview. DSM-IV diagnoses of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) were the criterion for which the sensitivity, specificity, positive- and negative predictive values and Receiver Operator Curves (ROC) for the PHQ-9 were calculated. RESULTS: The cut-off point of a summed score of 12 on the PHQ-9 resulted in a sensitivity of 75.7% and a specificity of 80.0%. Predictive values for negative and positive test results were respectively 93.4% and 46.7%. The ROC showed an area under the curve of 0.77. CONCLUSIONS: The PHQ-9 proved to be an efficient and well-received screening instrument for MDD in this sample of diabetes patients in a specialized outpatient clinic. The higher cut-off point of 12 that was needed and somewhat lower sensitivity than had been reported elsewhere may be due to the fact that the patients from a specialized diabetes clinic have more severe pathology and more complications, which could be recognized by the PHQ-9 as depression symptoms, while instead being diabetes symptoms.

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 · 10.1186/1472-6963-10-235

Cites

15 of 15 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

1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Steenbergen-Weijenburg, K. M., de Vroege, L., Ploeger, R. R., Brals, J. W., Vloedbeld, M. G., Veneman, T. F., Hakkaart-van Roijen, L., Rutten, F. F., Beekman, A. T., & van der Feltz-Cornelis, C. M.
Affiliations
  • Ziekenhuis Groep Twente (NL)
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Venue
BMC Health Services Research
Published
2010-08-12
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
235-235
ISSN
1472-6963 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2121827707
Cited by
200
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 12
FWCI
12.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Health Services Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
PHQ-9, Patient Health Questionnaire, depression screening, diabetes mellitus, major depressive disorder, screening tool validation, sensitivity and specificity, cut-off values
MeSH terms
Aged, Ambulatory Care Facilities, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, False Positive Reactions, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Diabetes Complications

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