IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socpsy/v59y2013i3p281-287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Schedule for Evaluating Persistent Symptoms (SEPS): A new method of recording medically unexplained symptoms

Author

Listed:
  • Helen Tyrer
  • Leila Ali
  • Faye Cooper
  • Paula Seivewright
  • Paul Bassett
  • Peter Tyrer

Abstract

Background: Medically unexplained symptoms are difficult to measure and in most cases the diagnosis is made either from independent data such as consultants’ opinions or medical outcomes, or by proxy measures such as numbers of symptoms or consultations. A valid self-rated measure would be of value in assessing this highly prevalent condition. Aims: To describe a new scale of nine items, the Schedule for Evaluation of Persistent Symptoms (SEPS), its properties, its internal consistency, its distribution in a sample of 470 medical patients, its relationship to social functioning and health anxiety (hypochondriasis), and its construct validity by comparing its results with an independent diagnostic examination of each patient’s notes two years subsequent to assessment. Method: A prevalence study was carried out in 405 consenting medical patients in primary care, cardiology, respiratory medicine, gastroenterology and endocrine clinics, in which the SEPS scale, the Health Anxiety Inventory (HAI) and the Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ) were each completed. Results: The mean score on the SEPS scale in 470 patients was 13.4. Exploratory factor analysis revealed two main factors, one concerned focus on symptoms and the other on their attribution. Examination of all data showed a cut-off point of 14 as indicating the presence of pathological medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). Agreement between the consultants’ diagnosis and pathological MUS scores was fairly good with a score of 14 or more on the SEPS showing sensitivity of 0.65 and negative predictive accuracy of 0.90. Conclusion: It is concluded that the SEPS scale has potential value in screening patients with suspected medically unexplained symptoms.

Suggested Citation

  • Helen Tyrer & Leila Ali & Faye Cooper & Paula Seivewright & Paul Bassett & Peter Tyrer, 2013. "The Schedule for Evaluating Persistent Symptoms (SEPS): A new method of recording medically unexplained symptoms," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 59(3), pages 281-287, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:59:y:2013:i:3:p:281-287
    DOI: 10.1177/0020764012438484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0020764012438484
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0020764012438484?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. Peter Tyrer & Ula Nur & Mike Crawford & Saffron Karlsen & Claire MacLean & Bharti Rao & Tony Johnson, 2005. "The Social Functioning Questionnaire: A Rapid and Robust Measure of Perceived Functioning," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 51(3), pages 265-275, September.
    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. Reema Samuel & Paul SS Russell & Tapan Kumar Paraseth & Sharmila Ernest & KS Jacob, 2016. "Development and validation of the Vellore Occupational Therapy Evaluation Scale to assess functioning in people with mental illness," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 62(7), pages 616-626, November.
    2. Andrew Stickley & Ai Koyanagi, 2018. "Physical multimorbidity and loneliness: A population-based study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, January.
    3. Sarah Butter & Jamie Murphy & Mark Shevlin & James Houston, 2017. "Social isolation and psychosis-like experiences: a UK general population analysis," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 291-300, October.
    4. Daniel Fu Keung Wong & Yves Cho Ho Cheung & Lindsay G Oades & Shengquan Sam Ye & Yat-nam Petrus Ng, 2024. "Strength-based cognitive-behavioural therapy and peer-to-peer support in the recovery process for people with schizophrenia: A randomised control trial," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 70(2), pages 364-377, March.
    5. Helen Tyrer & Peter Tyrer & Barbara Barrett, 2013. "Influence of dependent personality status on the outcome and health service costs of health anxiety," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 59(3), pages 274-280, May.
    6. Field, Andy Peter Professor & Wilcox, Rand R., 2017. "Robust statistical methods: a primer for clinical psychology and experimental psychopathology researchers," OSF Preprints v3nz4, Center for Open Science.
    7. Giles Newton-Howes & Doug Banks, 2014. "The subjective experience of community treatment orders: Patients’ views and clinical correlations," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 60(5), pages 474-481, August.

    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:sae:socpsy:v:59:y:2013:i:3:p:281-287. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.