Validation of the Russian version of the Hypomania Checklist (HCL-32) for the detection of Bipolar II disorder in patients with a current diagnosis of recurrent depression.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
There are no validated screening tools for Bipolar Disorder (BD) in Russia.
OBJECTIVE
To validate the Russian version of the HCL-32 for the detection of Bipolar II disorder (BD II) in patients with Recurrent Depressive Disorder (RDD).
METHODS
409 patients with a current diagnosis of RDD were recruited. The diagnosis was confirmed by the validated Russian version of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Another investigator interviewed the patients using the НСL-32 questions.
RESULTS
The total HCL-32 score in patients with BD II was significantly higher than in patients with RDD: 18.2 (4.22) versus 10.85 (5.81) (p<0.001, d=1447). At the cut-off 14 points the sensitivity was 83.7%, specificity 71.9% (p<0.001). The Cronbach's alpha was 0.887 that means good internal consistency. The best discrimination was achieved with 8 items: decreased need for sleep, less shyness or inhibition, talkativeness, more jokes and puns, jumping thoughts distractibility, exhausting or irritating others and high and more optimistic mood. We proposed the reduced variant of the scale, that includes only these 8 variables, with sensitivity 90.5%, specificity 69.8% (AUC=0.88).
CONCLUSIONS
The Russian version of the HCL-32 displayed a good ratio of sensitivity to specificity and can be recommended as a validated screening instrument. An 8-item version of HCL needs further research.
LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the specific nature of the sample, the HCL-32 assessment carried out by a psychiatrist, no comparison with other BD screening scales. The results of the 8-item version may be sample and culture dependent.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.