Key result
The Mandarin version of the Distress Thermometer (cutoff 4) yielded 98% sensitivity and 73% specificity for detecting psychosocial distress in cancer patients, showing higher sensitivity than HADS.
Why the study?
What are the sensitivity and specificity of the Mandarin versions of the HADS and DT for screening psychosocial distress in cancer patients?
Cross-Sectional (n=103)
No
What are the sensitivity and specificity of the Mandarin versions of the HADS and DT for screening psychosocial distress in cancer patients?
The Mandarin versions of the DT and HADS are efficacious for screening anxiety and depression in cancer patients, with the DT demonstrating higher sensitivity and specificity than the full HADS.
May aid distress screening in Mandarin-speaking cancer patients; leaves open multicenter validation before routine use.
PURPOSE: This study assesses the sensitivity and specificity of Mandarin versions of two psychosocial screening tools for adjustment, anxiety and depressive disorders: the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Distress Thermometer (DT). METHODS: The two scales were used to screen 103 consecutive cancer patients seen for psychiatric evaluation at KF-SYSCC between May and November 2004 prior to their psychiatric interviews. Each scale was tested against clinical psychiatric diagnoses based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition for their sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: For the Mandarin version of the DT, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses identified a DT score of 4 as the optimal cut-off, with sensitivity and specificity of 98 and 73%, respectively. For the Mandarin version of the HADS, ROC identified a score of 9 and 8 as the optimal cutoffs for the respective anxiety and depression subscales (HADS-a and HADS-d), with sensitivities and specificities of 84 and 73, 72 and 86%, respectively. For the full scale of the HADS (HADS-t), 15 was identified as the optimal cutoff, which yielded sensitivity and specificity of 84 and 68%, respectively. Using the frequency table, the concordance rate of the two scales was found to be 72-80% based on the above optimal cut-offs. CONCLUSION: The Mandarin versions of the HADS and the DT are efficacious for screening anxiety and depression for our population. Compared with the HADS-t, the DT appears to have not only higher sensitivity, but also higher specificity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2011) conducted a cross-sectional in Cancer with psychosocial distress (n=103). Mandarin versions of the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) vs. Clinical psychiatric diagnoses based on DSM-IV was evaluated on Sensitivity and specificity for adjustment, anxiety and depressive disorders. The Mandarin version of the Distress Thermometer (cutoff 4) yielded 98% sensitivity and 73% specificity for detecting psychosocial distress in cancer patients, showing higher sensitivity than HADS.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: