English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objectives: Optimal depression screening necessitates measurement tools that are valid across varied populations and in the presence of comorbidities. Methods: This study assessed the test properties of two versions of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale against psychiatric diagnoses established by the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview among a clinical sample of US Veterans deployed during Operations Enduring Freedom, Iraqi Freedom, and New Dawn. Participants (N = 359) recruited from two Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals completed a clinical interview, structured diagnostic interview, and self-reported measures. Results: Based on diagnostic interview and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th Edition criteria, 29.5% of the sample met diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder and 26.5% met diagnostic criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder. Both Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-20 and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-10 scales performed well and almost identically against the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview-major depressive disorder in identifying Veterans with major depressive disorder (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-20 area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve 91%; Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-10 area under the ROC curve 90%). Overall, higher cut points for the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scales performed better in correctly identifying true positives and true negatives for major depressive disorder (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-20 cut point 18+ sensitivity 92% specificity 72%; Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-10 cut point 10+ sensitivity 92% specificity 69%). Conclusions: The specificity of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scales was poor among Veterans with co-occurring post-traumatic stress disorder (13% and 16%). Veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder who have a positive depression screen should have a more thorough assessment of mental health symptoms and comorbidities, rather than immediate diagnosis of and treatment for depression

Validity of Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale in a sample of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans