The concurrent validity of brief screening questions for anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement in people with low back pain

Objectives: The aim of this study was to (1) test the concurrent validity of brief screening questions for 5 psychosocial constructs (anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement) and (2) translate into Danish and validate those screening questions. Materials and Me...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kent, Peter, Mirkhil, S., Keating, J., Buchbinder, R., Manniche, C., Albert, H.
Format: Journal Article
Published: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2014
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/54603
_version_ 1848759413986295808
author Kent, Peter
Mirkhil, S.
Keating, J.
Buchbinder, R.
Manniche, C.
Albert, H.
author_facet Kent, Peter
Mirkhil, S.
Keating, J.
Buchbinder, R.
Manniche, C.
Albert, H.
author_sort Kent, Peter
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Objectives: The aim of this study was to (1) test the concurrent validity of brief screening questions for 5 psychosocial constructs (anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement) and (2) translate into Danish and validate those screening questions. Materials and Methods: Data were collected from 5 cross-sectional samples (total n=1105) of people seeking care for low back pain in Australian primary care settings and a Danish secondary care hospital. The responses to English and Danish-translated versions of 1-item or 2-item screening questions were compared with those of validated full-length questionnaires. Results: Compared with anxiety, depression, and social isolation scores from full-length questionnaires, screening questionnaire responses demonstrated: a correlation of 0.62 to 0.83, overall accuracy of 78% to 91%, sensitivity of 70% to 82%, specificity of 75% to 95%, positive likelihood ratios of 3.3 to 13.9, and negative likelihood ratios of 0.21 to 0.33. For catastrophization and fear of movement, the results demonstrated: correlation of 0.89 to 0.95, overall accuracy of 88% to 93%, sensitivity of 78% to 88%, specificity of 91% to 96%, positive likelihood ratios of 9.5 to 20.8, and negative likelihood ratios of 0.13 to 0.23. Discussion: The concurrent validity of these screening questions was comparable to, or better than, alternate questions previously reported, and stable across age, sex, pain intensity, pain duration, and counties. On the basis of the observed likelihood ratios, all of the screening questions provided moderate or strong evidence to rule in or out an extreme score on each psychosocial construct. Given the ease of administration of these brief screening questions, their prognostic and treatment implications should be investigated.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T09:59:30Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-54603
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T09:59:30Z
publishDate 2014
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-546032017-09-13T16:11:35Z The concurrent validity of brief screening questions for anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement in people with low back pain Kent, Peter Mirkhil, S. Keating, J. Buchbinder, R. Manniche, C. Albert, H. Objectives: The aim of this study was to (1) test the concurrent validity of brief screening questions for 5 psychosocial constructs (anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement) and (2) translate into Danish and validate those screening questions. Materials and Methods: Data were collected from 5 cross-sectional samples (total n=1105) of people seeking care for low back pain in Australian primary care settings and a Danish secondary care hospital. The responses to English and Danish-translated versions of 1-item or 2-item screening questions were compared with those of validated full-length questionnaires. Results: Compared with anxiety, depression, and social isolation scores from full-length questionnaires, screening questionnaire responses demonstrated: a correlation of 0.62 to 0.83, overall accuracy of 78% to 91%, sensitivity of 70% to 82%, specificity of 75% to 95%, positive likelihood ratios of 3.3 to 13.9, and negative likelihood ratios of 0.21 to 0.33. For catastrophization and fear of movement, the results demonstrated: correlation of 0.89 to 0.95, overall accuracy of 88% to 93%, sensitivity of 78% to 88%, specificity of 91% to 96%, positive likelihood ratios of 9.5 to 20.8, and negative likelihood ratios of 0.13 to 0.23. Discussion: The concurrent validity of these screening questions was comparable to, or better than, alternate questions previously reported, and stable across age, sex, pain intensity, pain duration, and counties. On the basis of the observed likelihood ratios, all of the screening questions provided moderate or strong evidence to rule in or out an extreme score on each psychosocial construct. Given the ease of administration of these brief screening questions, their prognostic and treatment implications should be investigated. 2014 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/54603 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000010 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins restricted
spellingShingle Kent, Peter
Mirkhil, S.
Keating, J.
Buchbinder, R.
Manniche, C.
Albert, H.
The concurrent validity of brief screening questions for anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement in people with low back pain
title The concurrent validity of brief screening questions for anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement in people with low back pain
title_full The concurrent validity of brief screening questions for anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement in people with low back pain
title_fullStr The concurrent validity of brief screening questions for anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement in people with low back pain
title_full_unstemmed The concurrent validity of brief screening questions for anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement in people with low back pain
title_short The concurrent validity of brief screening questions for anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement in people with low back pain
title_sort concurrent validity of brief screening questions for anxiety, depression, social isolation, catastrophization, and fear of movement in people with low back pain
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/54603