IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i7p4011-d781465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Validating the Cutoff Score on Perinatal Mental Health Mood Screening Instruments, for Women and Men from Different Cultures or Languages, Really Necessary?

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Matthey

    (Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, Università degli Studi di Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy)

Abstract

Background : The most commonly used mood screening instrument in perinatal health is the Edinburgh Depression Scale. The screen-positive cut-off score on this scale, as for others, has been determined, via validation techniques, for over 20 languages/cultures, and for both women and men. While such validation appears to be considered essential, there are studies that could be interpreted to suggest that this is not an important consideration. Methods : Selective studies have been chosen to indicate these opposing points of view. Results : Examples of studies that support the notion of validating cut-off scores are described, as are examples of studies that appear not to support this point of view. Conclusions : (i) Clinical services and researchers need to be mindful of these opposing points of view, and openly discuss them when using screening cut-off scores for their respective populations. (ii) Researchers and Journals need to be more rigorous in ensuring this issue is correctly reported in studies, and/or openly discussed when relevant.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Matthey, 2022. "Is Validating the Cutoff Score on Perinatal Mental Health Mood Screening Instruments, for Women and Men from Different Cultures or Languages, Really Necessary?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-8, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:7:p:4011-:d:781465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4011/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4011/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:7:p:4011-:d:781465. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.