No abstract

BackgroundThe Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale (ODSIS) is a brief, five-item measure for assessing the frequency and intensity of depressive symptoms, as well as functional impairments in pleasurable activities, work or school, and interpersonal relationships due to depression. Although this scale is expected to be useful in various psychiatric and mental health settings, the reliability, validity, and interpretability have not yet been fully examined. This study was designed to examine the reliability, factorial, convergent, and discriminant validity of a Japanese version of the ODSIS, as well as its ability to distinguish between individuals with and without a major depressive disorder diagnosis.MethodsFrom a pool of registrants at an internet survey company, 2830 non-clinical and clinical participants were selected randomly (619 with major depressive disorder, 619 with panic disorder, 576 with social anxiety disorder, 645 with obsessive–compulsive disorder, and 371 non-clinical panelists). Participants were asked to respond to the ODSIS and conventional measures of depression, functional impairment, anxiety, neuroticism, satisfaction with life, and emotion regulation.ResultsExploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of three split subsamples indicated the unidimensional factor structure of ODSIS. Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis showed invariance of factor loadings between non-clinical and clinical subsamples. The ODSIS also showed excellent internal consistency and test–retest intraclass correlation coefficients. Convergence and discriminance of the ODSIS with various measures were in line with our expectations. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses showed that the ODSIS was able to detect a major depressive syndrome accurately.ConclusionsThis study supports the reliability and validity of ODSIS in a non-western population, which can be interpreted as demonstrating cross-cultural validity.

Aim: The present study aimed to test the construct validity and internal consistency of the Social Cognition Screening Questionnaire (SCSQ) (Japanese version). Methods:We first tested whether the subscale scores and the total score of the SCSQ could discriminate patients with schizophrenia from normal controls. Next, we tested the internal consistency. Finally, we investigated the relation between the subscale scores and other measures of social cognition and social functioning that were presumed to correspond to the subscale's scores, including the Hinting Task, the Ambiguous Intentions Hostility Questionnaire (AIHQ), the Beck Cognitive Insight Scale and the Social Functioning Scale. Results:The subscale scores and the total score appeared to show more robust between-group differences than other measures of social cognition, such as the AIHQ and the Hinting Task. The total score distinguished the patients from normal controls with an area under the receiver-operator curve of 0.84, which indicated a high level of discrimination. The Cronbach's alpha for the four subscales was 0.72, which was considered acceptable. In terms of criterion-related validity, theory of mind, metacognition and hostility bias subscale scores showed significant correlations with the Hinting Task, Beck Cognitive Insight Scale and AIHQ, respectively. Moreover, the theory of mind subscale score showed a significant correlation with four domain scores of the Social Functioning Scale. The present results indicated good construct validity and internal consistency of the SCSQ. Conclusions:Although this is an interim report with a small sample size, the SCSQ holds promise as an efficient measure for social cognition.

No abstract