Cited by 272Cancer survivorship and careAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Assessment of depression severity with the PHQ-9 in cancer patients and in the general population

Open access
Hinz, Andreas, Mehnert, Anja, Kocalevent, Rüya-Daniela, Brähler, Elmar, Forkmann, Thomas, Singer, Susanne, Schulte, Thomas·2016·BMC Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Patient Health Questionnaire PHQ-9 is a widely used instrument to screen for depression in clinical research. The first aim of this study was to psychometrically test the PHQ-9 in a large sample of cancer patients. The second aim was to calculate unbiased estimates of the depression burden for several cancer groups taking into account age and gender distributions. METHODS: A sample of 2,059 cancer patients with varying diagnoses were examined in this study six months after discharge from a rehabilitation clinic. A representative sample of 2,693 people from the general population served as controls. Expected PHQ-9 mean scores of the general population sample, regressed on age and gender, were calculated to enable a fair comparison of different groups of cancer patients. RESULTS: While the reliability (Cronbach's alpha) for the PHQ-9 scale was good (alpha ≥ 0.84), the CFA fit indices of the one-dimensional solution were unsatisfactory in the patients' sample. The factorial analysis confirmed two factors. PHQ-9 mean scores for 15 types of cancer are given, ranging from 4.0 (prostate) to 8.2 (thyroid gland). Differences between expected mean scores (derived from the general population) and raw mean scores of the cancer subsamples are reported that provide a better estimate of the depression burden. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirmed that the PHQ-9 performs well in testing depression in cancer patients. Regression coefficients can be used for performing unbiased comparisons among cancer groups, not only for this study. The burden of patients with testis cancer and Hodgkin lymphoma is underestimated when age and gender are not taken into account.

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/s12888-016-0728-6

Cites

44 of 44 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
Hinz, A., Mehnert, A., Kocalevent, R.-D., Brähler, E., Forkmann, T., Singer, S., & Schulte, T.
Affiliations
  • Leipzig University (DE)
  • University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
  • Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • Universitätsklinikum Aachen (DE)
  • Klinik Bad Oexen (DE)
Corresponding author
Hinz, Andreas
Venue
BMC Psychiatry
Published
2016-02-02
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
22-22
ISSN
1471-244X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2265298155
Cited by
272
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
8.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BMC Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Qucosa (Saxon State and University Library Dresden) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
PHQ-9, depression severity, cancer patients, psychometric validation, depression screening, cancer type differences, Hodgkin's disease, factor structure
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Sex Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Case-Control Studies, 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