Search

Emily OC Palmer,1 Sheryl Ker,2 Miguel E Rentería,3 Thomas Carmody,4 A John Rush5,6 1Holmusk Europe Ltd, London, UK; 2KKT Technologies, Pte. Ltd, Singapore; 3QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia; 4Peter O’Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; 5Duke University School of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA; 6Clinical sciences, Duke-National University of Singapore, SingaporeCorrespondence: Emily OC Palmer, Holmusk Europe Ltd, 414 Linen Hall, 162-168 Regent St, London, W1B 5TE, UK, Email emily.palmer@holmusk.comPurpose: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a leading cause of disability worldwide. An accurate assessment of depressive symptomology is crucial for clinical management and research. This study assessed the convergent validity, reliability, and total scale score interconversion across the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) self-report, the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-clinician report (QIDS-C) (two widely used clinical ratings) and the 5-item Very Brief Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-clinician report (VQIDS-C), which evaluate the core features of MDD.Patients and Methods: This study leveraged electronic health record (EHR)-derived, de-identified data from the NeuroBlu Database (Version 23R1), a longitudinal behavioural health real-world platform. Classical Test Theory (CTT) and Item Response Theory (IRT) analyses were used to evaluate the reliability, validity of, and conversions between the scales. The Test Information Function (TIF) was calculated for each scale, with greater test information reflecting higher precision and reliability in measuring depressive symptomology. IRT was also used to generate conversion tables so that total scores on each scale could be compared to the other.Results: The study sample (n = 2,156) had an average age of 36.4 years (standard deviation [SD] = 13.0) and 59.7% were female. The mean depression scores for the PHQ-9, QIDS-C, and VQIDS-C were 12.9 (SD = 6.6), 12.0 (SD = 4.9), and 6.18 (SD = 3.2), respectively. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for PHQ-9, QIDS-C, and VQIDS-C were 0.9, 0.8, and 0.7, respectively, suggesting acceptable internal consistency. PHQ-9 (TIF = 30.3) demonstrated the best assessment of depressive symptomology, followed by QIDS-C (TIF = 25.8) and VQIDS-C (TIF = 17.7).Conclusion: Overall, PHQ-9, QIDS-C, and VQIDS-C appear to be reliable and convertible measures of MDD symptomology within a US-based adult population in a real-world clinical setting.Keywords: psychometrics, linking, patient health questionnaire, quick inventory of depressive symptoms, depression, real-world data

Joseph M Trombello,1 Alexandra Kulikova,2 Taryn L Mayes,1 Karabi Nandy,1,3 Thomas Carmody,1,3 Gavin Bart,4 Edward V Nunes,5 Joy Schmitz,6 Mariah Kalmin,7 Steven Shoptaw,7 Madhukar H Trivedi1 1Center for Depression Research and Clinical Care, Peter O’Donnell Jr. Brain Institute and Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; 2Department of Educational Psychology, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA; 3Peter O’Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; 4Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA; 5Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA; 6Faillace Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas (UT Health) at Houston, Houston, TX, USA; 7Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USACorrespondence: Madhukar H Trivedi, Center for Depression Research and Clinical Care, Peter O’Donnell Jr. Brain Institute and Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75390-9119, USA, Tel +214-648-0188, Fax +214-648-0167, Email Madhukar.Trivedi@utsouthwestern.eduBackground: The co-occurrence of suicidality and substance use disorders has been well established, but rating scales to examine suicidal behavior and risk are sparse among participants with substance use disorders. We examined the psychometric properties of the 16-item Concise Health Risk Tracking Scale – Self Report (CHRT-SR16) to measure suicidality among adults with moderate-to-severe methamphetamine use disorder.Methods: Participants (n = 403) with moderate-to-severe methamphetamine use disorder completed the CHRT-SR16 as part of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pharmacotherapy trial. The CHRT-SR16 factor structure was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Internal consistency was estimated with coefficients alpha (α) and omega (ω), test-retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement, and convergent validity using Spearman’s ρ rank order correlation coefficient test between CHRT-SR16 factors and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). The analyses utilized baseline and week 1 data (for test-retest reliability only).Results: CFA revealed a seven-factor model of Pessimism, Helplessness, Social Support, Despair, Impulsivity, Irritability, and Suicidal Thoughts as the best-fitting model. The CHRT-SR16 also exhibited strong internal consistency (α = 0.89; ω = 0.89), test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.78) and convergent validity with the PHQ-9 total score (ρ = 0.62).Conclusion: The CHRT-SR16 showed strong psychometric properties in a sample of participants with primary methamphetamine use disorder.Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03078075.Keywords: stimulant use disorder, confirmatory factor analysis, irritability, impulsivity, propensity, PHQ-9

Charlotte L Haley,1 Betsy D Kennard,1,2 David W Morris,1 Ira H Bernstein,3 Thomas Carmody,4 Graham J Emslie,1,2 Taryn L Mayes,1 A John Rush5– 7 1Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; 2Children’s Health, Children’s Medical Center of Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA; 3Department of Psychology, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA; 4Peter O’Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; 5Department of Psychiatry and Clinical Sciences, Duke-National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore; 6Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Texas Tech University – Health Sciences Center, Permian Basin, TX, USA; 7Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USACorrespondence: Betsy D Kennard, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Child Psychiatry, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75390-8589, USA, Tel +1 214.645.8680, Fax +1 214.648.3914, Email beth.kennard@utsouthwestern.eduObjective: The current study aimed to evaluate the psychometric features of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Adolescent version (QIDS-A17) and the clinician-rated Children’s Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R).Methods: Altogether, 103 outpatients (8 to 17 years) completed the self-report QIDS-A17-SR. Clinician interviews of adolescents (QIDS-A17-C (Adolescent)) and of parents (QIDS-A17-C (Parent)) were combined to create the QIDS-A17-C(Composite) and the CDRS-R.Results: All QIDS-A17 measures and the CDRS-R evidenced high total score correlations and internal consistency. Factor analysis found all four measures to be unidimensional. Item Response Theory (IRT) analysis found results that complemented the reliability results found in CTT. All four also demonstrated discriminant diagnostic validity based on logistic regression and ANOVA analyses.Conclusion: The psychometric properties of the self-report and composite versions of the QIDS-A17 suggest acceptability as a measure of depression in adolescents either as a measure of depressive symptoms or severity of illness in adolescents. The self-report version may be a helpful tool in busy clinical practices.Keywords: pediatric depression, rating scale, psychometric properties, self-report measures

A John Rush,1– 3 Nancy D Madia,4 Thomas Carmody,5 Madhukar H Trivedi6,7 1Department of Psychiatry, Texas Tech University Health Science Center, Midland, TX, USA; 2Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA; 3Duke-National University of Singapore, Singapore; 4Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center Permian Basin, Odessa, TX, USA; 5Department of Population and Data Science, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; 6Peter O’Donnell Jr. Brain Institute, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; 7Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USACorrespondence: Madhukar H Trivedi, Center for Depression Research and Clinical Care, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390-9119, USA, Tel +1 214-648-0188, Fax +1 214-648-0167, Email madhukar.trivedi@utSouthwestern.eduPurpose: Evaluate the psychometric properties of the 5-item Very Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology self-report and clinician-rated versions (VQIDS-SR5/VQIDS-C5), compare their relative performance, create crosswalks between their total scores and other accepted depressive symptom ratings, and define clinically relevant depressive symptom severity thresholds and categorical outcomes for both versions.Patients and Methods: The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression trial obtained baseline and exit 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD17) and 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology – Clinician-rated scores, and baseline and visit-wise QIDS-SR16 and QIDS-C16 ratings from the first treatment step (citalopram). The VQIDS-C5 and the VQIDS-SR5 items (sad mood, self-outlook, involvement, fatigue, psychomotor slowing) (each rated 0– 3), extracted from the corresponding 16-item ratings, were selected to best reflect the 6-item HRSD (HRSD6) (exclusive of anxiety). Classical Test Theory (CTT) and Item-Response Theory (IRT) analyses assessed psychometric features. IRT analyses produced total score crosswalks between the VQIDS5, QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16 and HRSD6. Clinically relevant VQIDS symptom severity thresholds and treatment outcomes were estimated based on cross-walks from the parent QIDS16 ratings.Results: Both VQIDS versions were unifactorial with acceptable internal consistencies (Cronbach’s alphas > 0.80), item-total correlations (0.57– 0.74) by CCT, and strong IRT item performance. Based on QIDS16 severity thresholds (none 0– 5; mild 6– 10; moderate 11– 15; severe 16– 20; and very severe 21– 27), comparable thresholds were 0– 2; 3– 5; 6– 9; 9– 12; and > 12 for VQIDS-C5, and 0– 2; 2– 5; 6– 8; 9– 12; and > 12 for VQIDS-SR5. Kappa values were acceptable in comparing categories of outcomes (eg, no benefit, remission, etc) based on VQIDS and corresponding QIDS categories.Conclusion: The VQIDS-C5 and VQIDS-SR5 assess selected core depressive symptoms with psychometrically acceptable properties. Theelf-report and clinician-rated versions provide virtually identical information, symptom severity thresholds and symptom change categories. Both are as sensitive to change as the corresponding QIDS16, making them suitable for use in busy practices.Keywords: depression, self-report, psychometrics, rating scales, QIDS, symptoms

The Second Vatican Council's constitution Gaudium et Spes stated that man is 'the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake'. Post‐conciliar Catholic teaching on the environment largely reproduced this anthropocentric theology. Pope Francis' encyclical letter Laudato Si', however, appears directly to contradict this well‐established tradition with its repeated assertions of the intrinsic value of nonhuman life and its critical approach to the term 'anthropocentrism'. Questioning this putative discontinuity, this article challenges the perception that Laudato Si' has definitively rejected anthropocentrism. It suggests that the claim for the intrinsic value of nonhuman life, and the traditional assertion that man is the only creature willed for its own sake, can be seen to converge in light of the traditional theological anthropology of the human being as microcosm. On this view, the centrality of the human person in the order of creation is constituted by its gathering up of the sakes of creatures. The distinctive place of the human does not come at the expense of the rest of creation, but rather is the means of creation's movement towards the unity and harmony to which God calls it. Laudato Si' is distinguished not by its rejection of anthropocentrism, but by its refusal to set human and nonhuman over against one another. In contrast, the language of 'intrinsic value' is criticised for conceiving created value as a zero‐sum game, as though human and nonhuman value are in competition with one another; the language of 'stewardship' is criticised for its extrinsicist conception of the human being in the natural order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]