The objectives of this study are to develop a brief self-rated screening instrument for generalized social anxiety disorder (GSAD) and to test the efficiency of the instrument. The Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN), a 17-item self-administered scale for GSAD, was given to 263 individuals with GSAD and controls. A subset of three items yielding high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of GSAD was identified. This abbreviated version of the SPIN (Mini-SPIN) was administered to a group of managed care patients in conjunction with an epidemiological study of GSAD. Patients (n = 7,165) were sent a questionnaire comprising the Mini-SPIN and a brief depression screener. Respondents screening positive for GSAD on the Mini-SPIN (n = 344) were interviewed using the social phobia module of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) to verify the diagnosis. A random sample of those who screened negative for GSAD on the Mini-SPIN were administered a similar interview to identify two control groups without GSAD for comparison (n = 673). With this information, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the Mini-SPIN were determined (weighted for sampling). Using a cutoff score of 6 or greater, the Mini-SPIN demonstrated a sensitivity of 88.7%, specificity of 90.0%, positive predictive value of 52.5%, and negative predictive value of 98.5%. The scale possessed 90% accuracy (efficiency) in diagnosing the presence or absence of GSAD in a managed care population. The Mini-SPIN demonstrates good efficiency, supporting its utility as a screening tool for generalized social anxiety disorder.

Background: Recent factor-analytic studies in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) identified consistent symptom dimensions. Support for the validity of these dimensions comes from studies of psychiatric comorbidity, functional brain imaging, genetic transmission, and treatment response to medications. This study examined whether previously identified OCD symptom dimensions are associated with treatment compliance and response to behaviour therapy (BT) for OCD. Methods: One hundred and fifty-three OCD outpatients who participated in a multi-centre randomised controlled trial of computer- versus clinician-guided BT for OCD were included in the study. Logistic and multiple regression models tested for significant predictors of compliance with and response to BT and relaxation. Results: The patients studied were phenomenologically comparable (including the presence of ‘pure’ obsessions and mental rituals) to those in previous serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SRI) trials and those in clinical epidemiology studies. High scorers on the ‘hoarding’ dimension were more likely to drop out prematurely from the study and tended to improve less. For those completing treatment, the strongest predictor of outcome was pre-treatment severity. Initial depression scores were unrelated to outcome. After controlling for symptom severity, higher scores on the ‘sexual/religious obsessions’ factor predicted poorer outcome with BT, especially when computer-guided. Conclusions: BT is especially indicated for OCD patients with aggressive/checking, contamination/cleaning and symmetry/ordering symptoms. Previous accounts of unsuccessful BT in patients with hoarding symptoms may be due in part to their propensity to drop out earlier from treatment. Patients with sexual/religious obsessions, but not those with mental rituals, might respond less well to traditional BT techniques. Existing treatments need to be refined and/or new treatments developed to improve these patients’ adherence and response to treatment.

Use of the SIGMA can result in high reliability of MADRS scores in evaluating patients with depression.

No abstract

This report describes the GRID-Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (GRID-HAMD), an improved version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale that was developed through a broad-based international consensus process. The GRID-HAMD separates the frequency of the symptom from its intensity for most items, refines several problematic anchors, and integrates both a structured interview guide and consensus-derived conventions for all items. Usability was established in a small three-site sample of convenience, evaluating 29 outpatients, with most evaluators finding the scale easy to use. Test-retest (4-week) and interrater reliability were established in 34 adult outpatients with major depressive disorder, as part of an ongoing clinical trial. In a separate study, interrater reliability was found to be superior to the Guy version of the HAMD, and as good as the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (SIGH-D), across 30 interview pairs. Finally, using the SIGH-D as the criterion standard, the GRID-HAMD demonstrated high concurrent validity. Overall, these data suggest that the GRID-HAMD is an improvement over the original Guy version as well as the SIGH-D in its incorporation of innovative features and preservation of high reliability and validity.