IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0148935.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychometric Properties of Prodromal Questionnaire-Brief Version among Chinese Help-Seeking Individuals

Author

Listed:
  • LiHua Xu
  • TianHong Zhang
  • LiNa Zheng
  • HuiJun Li
  • YingYing Tang
  • XingGuang Luo
  • JianHua Sheng
  • JiJun Wang

Abstract

Prodromal Questionnaire (PQ) and Structured Interview for Prodromal Syndromes (SIPS) have been used as a two-stage process for identifying subjects at clinical high risk (CHR) of psychosis. The Prodromal Questionnaire-Brief version (PQ-B) contains 21 items derived from the PQ. The present study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of PQ-B in a Chinese help-seeking outpatient sample and to explore which items can better predict CHR diagnosis by SIPS and future transition to psychosis. In our preliminary epidemiological study, 1461 patients from a pool of 2101 individuals (15–45 years of age) completed the two-stage process. In the present study, 239 (20%) people were randomly selected among the sample who met the initial PQ-B screening criteria but had no positive diagnosis on SIPS, as well as 72 individuals with negative results on both PQ-B and SIPS, 89 prodromal and 105 psychotic subjects, yielding a total of 505 participants. The internal consistency coefficient for the PQ-B was good, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.897. The concordant validity of PQ-B with SIPS dichotomized diagnosis of prodrome/psychosis versus no psychosis was 0.54. To ensure 80% or a higher sensitivity and a certain specificity, 7 and 24 were respectively set as the cutoff points for the PQ-B total score and distress score for Chinese help-seeking outpatients. A logistic regression model based on six PQ-B items could allow predicting the psychotic diagnosis on SIPS, with an accuracy of 65.8%. Prodromal individuals who scored higher on the 12th item of PQ-B (Do you worry at times that something may be wrong with your mind?) were less likely to convert to psychosis. PQ-B is a useful instrument for screening CHR subjects, but the cutoff score may be higher than that recommended by the author scores for help-seeking individuals in outpatient clinics. Some specific PQ-B items may have significant predictive power on dichotomized SIPS diagnoses and deserve special attention from researchers in future studies.

Suggested Citation

  • LiHua Xu & TianHong Zhang & LiNa Zheng & HuiJun Li & YingYing Tang & XingGuang Luo & JianHua Sheng & JiJun Wang, 2016. "Psychometric Properties of Prodromal Questionnaire-Brief Version among Chinese Help-Seeking Individuals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0148935
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148935
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0148935
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0148935&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0148935?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michele Solis, 2014. "Prevention: Before the break," Nature, Nature, vol. 508(7494), pages 12-13, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pauline Katharina Mantell & Annika Baumeister & Stephan Ruhrmann & Anna Janhsen & Christiane Woopen, 2021. "Attitudes towards Risk Prediction in a Help Seeking Population of Early Detection Centers for Mental Disorders—A Qualitative Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-13, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0148935. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.