Proxy measures for the assessment of psychotic and affective symptoms in studies using electronic health records.
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.
López-Díaz Álvaro, Palermo-Zeballos Fernanda Jazmín, Gutierrez-Rojas Luis, Alameda Luis, Gotor-Sánchez-Luengo Francisco, Garrido-Torres Nathalia, Métrailler Johann, Alerci Livia, Bonnarel Vincent, Cano-Domínguez Pablo, Avanesi-Molina Elma, Soto-Ontoso Miguel, Torrecilla-Olavarrieta Rocio, Muñoz-Manchado Leticia Irene, Torres-Hernández Pedro, González-Higueras Fermín, Prados-Ojeda Juan Luis, Herrera-Cortés Mario, Meca-García José Miguel, Gordillo-Urbano Rafael Manuel, Sánchez-Robles Cristina, Delgado-Durán Tomás, Soriano-Peña María Felipa, Golay Philippe, Conus Philippe, Crespo-Facorro Benedicto, Ruiz-Veguilla Miguel
Аннотация
AIMS: This study aimed to validate proxy tools for the short versions of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS-6), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS-6) and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS-6).
METHOD: A cross-sectional, multicentre study was conducted in a sample of 116 patients with first-episode psychosis from 12 public hospitals in Spain. Concordance between PANSS-6, YMRS-6 and MADRS-6 scores and their respective proxies was evaluated based on information from EHR clinical notes, using a variety of statistical procedures, including multivariate tests to adjust for potential confounders. Bootstrapping techniques were used for internal validation, and an independent cohort from the Treatment and Early Intervention in Psychosis Program (TIPP-Lausanne, Switzerland) for external validation.
RESULTS: The proxy versions correlated strongly with their respective standardised scales (partial correlations ranged from 0.75 to 0.84) and had good accuracy and discriminatory power in distinguishing between patients in and not in remission (percentage of patients correctly classified ranged from 83.9 to 91.4% and bootstrapped optimism-corrected area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.76 to 0.89), with high interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.81). The findings remained robust in the external validation data-set.
CONCLUSIONS: The proxy instruments proposed for assessing psychotic and affective symptoms by reviewing EHR provide a feasible and reliable alternative to traditional structured psychometric procedures, and a promising methodology for real-world practice settings.