A cross-validation of the provisional diagnostic instrument (PDI-4)

dc.contributor.authorFaries, Douglas E.
dc.contributor.authorHouston, John P.
dc.contributor.authorSulcs, Ellen M.
dc.contributor.authorSwindle, Ralph W.
dc.contributor.departmentPsychiatry, School of Medicine
dc.date.accessioned2025-06-12T13:15:57Z
dc.date.available2025-06-12T13:15:57Z
dc.date.issued2012-10-15
dc.description.abstractBackground: The Provisional Diagnostic Instrument (PDI-4) is a brief, adult self-report instrument for 4 common psychiatric diagnoses in primary care patients: major depressive episode (MDE), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and bipolar I disorder based on past or present mania. Our objective was to assess validity of the PDI-4 in a population independent of the study population originally used to develop the scale. Methods: An online version of the 17-item PDI-4 was administered to 1,047 adults in the US; respondents also completed the PHQ-9, HADS-A, CAARS-S, and MDQ within the online survey. Respondents self-reported diagnosis by a healthcare professional with the terms depression (n=221), anxiety (n=218), attention deficit disorder (n=206), bipolar or manic depressive disorder (n=195), or none of these (n=207). Statistical analyses examined convergent and discriminant validity, and operating characteristics of the PDI-4 relative to the individual, validated, self-rated scales PHQ-9, HADS-A, CAARS-S, and MDQ, for each PDI-4 diagnosis. Results: Convergent validity of the PDI-4 was supported by strong correlations with the corresponding individual scales (range of 0.63 [PDI-4 and MDQ] to 0.87 [PDI-4 and PHQ-9]). Operating characteristics of the PDI-4 were similar to results in the previous site-based study. The scale exhibited moderate sensitivities (0.52 [mania] to 0.70 [ADHD]) and strong specificities (0.86 [mania] to 0.92 [GAD]) using the individual scales as the gold standards. ANOVAs demonstrated that PDI-4 discriminated between subsets of patients defined by pre-specified severity level cutoff scores of the individual scales. However, overlapping symptoms and co-morbidities made differentiation between mental diagnoses much weaker than differentiation from the control group with none of the diagnoses. Conclusions: The PDI-4 appears to be a suitable, brief, self-rated tool for provisional diagnoses of common mental disorders. However, the high level of symptom overlap between these diagnoses emphasizes that such brief scales are not a replacement for thorough diagnostic evaluation by trained medical providers.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.identifier.citationFaries DE, Houston JP, Sulcs EM, Swindle RW. A cross-validation of the provisional diagnostic instrument (PDI-4). BMC Fam Pract. 2012;13:104. Published 2012 Oct 15. doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-104
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/48646
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Nature
dc.relation.isversionof10.1186/1471-2296-13-104
dc.relation.journalBMC Family Practice
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourcePMC
dc.subjectCross validation
dc.subjectDiagnostic instrument
dc.subjectAnxiety
dc.subjectDepression
dc.subjectHyperactivity
dc.subjectMania
dc.titleA cross-validation of the provisional diagnostic instrument (PDI-4)
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Faries2012Cross-CCBY.pdf
Size:
454.4 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.04 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: