Ugh this is an irresponsible headline and a pretty dubious study. Compared NHANES to an internet survey conducted in April that used a 13-point rating of depression *symptoms*, not depression diagnoses
https://twitter.com/elemental/status/1323533016476618752 …
-
-
I should clarify, it was probably unfair to cash the study dubious - while I'm skeptical that the specific numbers in the study are comparable, the main point was just that there were probably a few more depression symptoms than we'd usually expect to see in 2020 which is fair
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Fair obs. Perhaps, in similar vein, a little less certainty merited around the battery of post infection sequelae being written about under the Long Covid Umbrella.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think you should look more into the literature on the PHQ-9, e.g. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32515813/ Also this is a survey on a nationally representative sample, as explained in the methods. So really, dubious does not cut it at all. (No idea about the Medium post, which I did not read).
-
More generally, peer-review by Twitter still should revise the relevant literature before making claims like calling PHQ-9 "a 13-item scale" with no reference to other studies that used it or researched it.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.