Internal structure of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Duckhee Chae, Jiyeon Lee, Eun-Hyun Lee
{"title":"Internal structure of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Duckhee Chae, Jiyeon Lee, Eun-Hyun Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.anr.2024.12.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This review aimed to evaluate the internal structure (structural validity, internal consistency, and measurement invariance) of the Patient Health Questionnire-9 (PHQ-9), which is one of the most widely used self-administered instruments for assessing and screening depression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The updated COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology for a systematic review of self-reported instruments was used. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from their inception up to February 28, 2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study reviewed 98 psychometric studies reported on in 90 reports conducted in 40 countries. Various versions of the PHQ-9 were identified: one-factor structures (8 types), two-factor structures (10 types), bifactor structures (4 types), three-factor structure (1 type), and second-order three-factor structure (1 type). There was sufficient high-quality evidence for structural validity of the one-factor structure with nine items scored using a four-point Likert scale based on confirmatory factor analysis, for internal consistency with a quantitatively pooled Cronbach's alpha of .85, and for measurement invariance across sex, age, education level, marital status, and income groups. There was sufficient high-quality evidence for structural validity, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = .76 - .92, = .83 - .92), and measurement invariance across sex for the PHQ-8 (which excluded item 9: \"suicidality or self-harm thoughts\").</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The one-factor PHQ-9 and PHQ-8 (excluding item 9) scored using a four-point Likert scale have the best internal structure based on the current evidence. The one-factor PHQ-9 and PHQ-8 justify the use of aggregated total scores in both practice and research. The total score of the PHQ-9 using a four-point Likert scale can be used to compare depression levels across sex, age, education level, marital status, and income groups due to the availability of sufficient evidence for measurement invariance across these demographic groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":55450,"journal":{"name":"Asian Nursing Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Nursing Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anr.2024.12.005","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This review aimed to evaluate the internal structure (structural validity, internal consistency, and measurement invariance) of the Patient Health Questionnire-9 (PHQ-9), which is one of the most widely used self-administered instruments for assessing and screening depression.

Methods: The updated COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology for a systematic review of self-reported instruments was used. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from their inception up to February 28, 2023.

Results: This study reviewed 98 psychometric studies reported on in 90 reports conducted in 40 countries. Various versions of the PHQ-9 were identified: one-factor structures (8 types), two-factor structures (10 types), bifactor structures (4 types), three-factor structure (1 type), and second-order three-factor structure (1 type). There was sufficient high-quality evidence for structural validity of the one-factor structure with nine items scored using a four-point Likert scale based on confirmatory factor analysis, for internal consistency with a quantitatively pooled Cronbach's alpha of .85, and for measurement invariance across sex, age, education level, marital status, and income groups. There was sufficient high-quality evidence for structural validity, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = .76 - .92, = .83 - .92), and measurement invariance across sex for the PHQ-8 (which excluded item 9: "suicidality or self-harm thoughts").

Conclusions: The one-factor PHQ-9 and PHQ-8 (excluding item 9) scored using a four-point Likert scale have the best internal structure based on the current evidence. The one-factor PHQ-9 and PHQ-8 justify the use of aggregated total scores in both practice and research. The total score of the PHQ-9 using a four-point Likert scale can be used to compare depression levels across sex, age, education level, marital status, and income groups due to the availability of sufficient evidence for measurement invariance across these demographic groups.

患者健康问卷-9的内部结构:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:本综述旨在评估患者健康问卷-9 (PHQ-9)的内部结构(结构效度、内部一致性和测量不变性),PHQ-9是最广泛使用的自我给药抑郁评估和筛查工具之一。方法:采用更新后的基于共识的健康测量仪器选择标准(COSMIN)方法对自我报告的仪器进行系统评价。PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO和Cochrane图书馆数据库从其成立到2023年2月28日进行了检索。结果:本研究回顾了40个国家90份报告中98份心理测量学研究报告。PHQ-9分为单因子结构(8种)、双因子结构(10种)、双因子结构(4种)、三因子结构(1种)和二阶三因子结构(1种)。采用验证性因子分析的李克特四分量表对九个项目进行评分的单因素结构的结构效度、定量汇总的Cronbach's alpha值为0.85的内部一致性,以及跨性别、年龄、教育水平、婚姻状况和收入群体的测量不变性,都有足够的高质量证据。PHQ-8的结构效度、内部一致性(Cronbach's alpha = 0.76 - 0.92, = 0.83 - 0.92)和测量的性别不变性(排除了第9项:“自杀或自残想法”)有足够的高质量证据。结论:基于现有证据,单因素PHQ-9和PHQ-8(不包括第9项)采用四分制李克特量表评分具有最佳的内部结构。单因素PHQ-9和PHQ-8证明了在实践和研究中使用综合总分的合理性。采用李克特四分制的PHQ-9总分可用于比较不同性别、年龄、教育水平、婚姻状况和收入群体的抑郁水平,因为有足够的证据证明这些人口统计群体的测量不变性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
32
审稿时长
45 days
期刊介绍: Asian Nursing Research is the official peer-reviewed research journal of the Korean Society of Nursing Science, and is devoted to publication of a wide range of research that will contribute to the body of nursing science and inform the practice of nursing, nursing education, administration, and history, on health issues relevant to nursing, and on the testing of research findings in practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信