Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Rapid Mood Screener for Bipolar Disorder (RMS-T): A Validity and Reliability Study

IF 3.9 2区医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY

Bipolar Disorders Pub Date : 2026-09-04 DOI:10.1111/bdi.70181

Yasan Bilge Sair, Roger S. McIntyre, Burkay Karadag, Mevlut Ture, Bilge Dogan, Beliz Tural, Tutku Demir Ok, Hande Akbal, Sena Merve Kırmacı, Ceyhan Akkeyik

{"title":"Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Rapid Mood Screener for Bipolar Disorder (RMS-T): A Validity and Reliability Study","authors":"Yasan Bilge Sair, Roger S. McIntyre, Burkay Karadag, Mevlut Ture, Bilge Dogan, Beliz Tural, Tutku Demir Ok, Hande Akbal, Sena Merve Kırmacı, Ceyhan Akkeyik","doi":"10.1111/bdi.70181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>The Rapid Mood Screener (RMS) is a reliable and validated brief, point-of-care, patient-administered screening tool for bipolar disorders. Herein we aim to evaluate the reliability and validity of the RMS in Turkish adults with bipolar I disorder (BD).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Forward and backward translation was conducted for the English version of the RMS to the Turkish version of RMS (RMS-T). We conducted a ROC analysis for both the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) and RMS-T in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) or BD. The maximum sensitivity and specificity were also calculated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We recruited 128 participants (<i>n</i> = 63 BD-I, <i>n</i> = 65 MDD). Participants who responded 4 or more “yes” out of six items on the RMS-T were adjudicated as a positive screen for BD-I. The sensitivity of the RMS-T was 79.4% and the specificity was 84.6%. The RMS-T was determined to be of higher discriminative power in discriminating BD relative to the MDQ (AUC = 0.865, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The RMS-T is a valid and easy-to-use self-administer tool for the identification of BD-I in individuals with depression. The RMS has many advantages over the MDQ in clinical settings by having fewer items, a simpler scoring system, and shorter completion time. Early screening and detection of BD is critical for appropriate treatment selection to achieve the goal of overall improving health outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":8959,"journal":{"name":"Bipolar Disorders","volume":"28 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bipolar Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bdi.70181","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The Rapid Mood Screener (RMS) is a reliable and validated brief, point-of-care, patient-administered screening tool for bipolar disorders. Herein we aim to evaluate the reliability and validity of the RMS in Turkish adults with bipolar I disorder (BD).

Method

Forward and backward translation was conducted for the English version of the RMS to the Turkish version of RMS (RMS-T). We conducted a ROC analysis for both the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) and RMS-T in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) or BD. The maximum sensitivity and specificity were also calculated.

Results

We recruited 128 participants (n = 63 BD-I, n = 65 MDD). Participants who responded 4 or more “yes” out of six items on the RMS-T were adjudicated as a positive screen for BD-I. The sensitivity of the RMS-T was 79.4% and the specificity was 84.6%. The RMS-T was determined to be of higher discriminative power in discriminating BD relative to the MDQ (AUC = 0.865, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The RMS-T is a valid and easy-to-use self-administer tool for the identification of BD-I in individuals with depression. The RMS has many advantages over the MDQ in clinical settings by having fewer items, a simpler scoring system, and shorter completion time. Early screening and detection of BD is critical for appropriate treatment selection to achieve the goal of overall improving health outcomes.

查看原文本刊更多论文

土耳其版双相情感障碍快速情绪筛查量表（RMS-T）的心理测量特性：效度和信度研究。

目的：快速情绪筛查（RMS）是一种可靠且经过验证的简短，即时护理，患者管理的双相情感障碍筛查工具。在这里，我们的目的是评估RMS在土耳其成人双相I型障碍（BD）的信度和效度。方法：将英文RMS （RMS- t）正反译为土耳其语RMS （RMS- t）。我们对重度抑郁障碍（MDD）或BD的成人心境障碍问卷（MDQ）和RMS-T进行了ROC分析，并计算了最大敏感性和特异性。结果：我们招募了128名参与者（n = 63 BD-I, n = 65 MDD）。在RMS-T的六个项目中回答4个或更多“是”的参与者被判定为BD-I的阳性筛查。RMS-T的敏感性为79.4%，特异性为84.6%。与MDQ相比，RMS-T在判别双相障碍方面具有更高的判别能力（AUC = 0.865, p）。结论：RMS-T是一种有效且易于使用的自我管理工具，可用于识别抑郁症患者的BD- i。在临床环境中，RMS比MDQ有很多优点，项目更少，评分系统更简单，完成时间更短。早期筛查和发现双相障碍对于选择适当的治疗方法以实现整体改善健康结果的目标至关重要。

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

Bipolar Disorders 医学-精神病学

CiteScore

8.20

自引率

7.40%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Bipolar Disorders is an international journal that publishes all research of relevance for the basic mechanisms, clinical aspects, or treatment of bipolar disorders and related illnesses. It intends to provide a single international outlet for new research in this area and covers research in the following areas: biochemistry physiology neuropsychopharmacology neuroanatomy neuropathology genetics brain imaging epidemiology phenomenology clinical aspects and therapeutics of bipolar disorders Bipolar Disorders also contains papers that form the development of new therapeutic strategies for these disorders as well as papers on the topics of schizoaffective disorders, and depressive disorders as these can be cyclic disorders with areas of overlap with bipolar disorders. The journal will consider for publication submissions within the domain of: Perspectives, Research Articles, Correspondence, Clinical Corner, and Reflections. Within these there are a number of types of articles: invited editorials, debates, review articles, original articles, commentaries, letters to the editors, clinical conundrums, clinical curiosities, clinical care, and musings.