The "help" question doesn't help when screening for major depression: external validation of the three-question screening test for primary care patients managed for physical complaints.

BACKGROUND: Major depression, although frequent in primary care, is commonly hidden behind multiple physical complaints that are often the first and only reason for patient consultation. Major depression can be screened by two validated questions that are easier to use in primary care than the full DSM-IV criteria. A third question, called the "help" question, improves the specificity without apparently decreasing the sensitivity of this screening procedure. We validated the abbreviated screening procedure for major depression with and without the "help" question in primary care patients managed for a physical complaint. METHODS: This diagnostic accuracy study used data from a cohort study called SODA (for SOmatisation Depression Anxiety ) conducted by 24 general practitioners (GPs) in western Switzerland that included patients over 18 years of age with at least one physical complaint at index consultation. Major depression was identified with the full Patient Health Questionnaire. GPs were asked to screen patients for major depression with the three screening questions one year after inclusion. RESULTS: Out of 937 patients with at least one physical complaint, 751 were eligible one year after index consultation. Major depression was diagnosed in 69/724 (9.5%) patients. The sensitivity and specificity of the two-question method alone were 91.3% (95% confidence interval 81.4-96.4%) and 65.0% (95% confidence interval 61.2-68.6%), respectively. Adding the "help" question decreased the sensitivity (59.4% ; 95% confidence interval 47.0-70.9%) but improved the specificity (88.2% ; 95% confidence interval 85.4-90.5%) of the three-question method. CONCLUSIONS: The use of two screening questions for major depression was associated with high sensitivity and low specificity in primary care patients presenting a physical complaint. Adding the "help" question improved the specificity but clearly decreased the sensitivity; when using the "help" question; four out of ten patients with depression will be missed, compared to only one out of ten with the two-question method. Therefore, the "help" question is not useful as a screening question, but may help discussing management strategies.

Anatomical correlates for category-specific naming of objects and actions: A brain stimulation mapping study.

The production of object and action words can be dissociated in aphasics, yet their anatomical correlates have been difficult to distinguish in functional imaging studies. To investigate the extent to which the cortical neural networks underlying object- and action-naming processing overlap, we performed electrostimulation mapping (ESM), which is a neurosurgical mapping technique routinely used to examine language function during brain-tumor resections. Forty-one right-handed patients who had surgery for a brain tumor were asked to perform overt naming of object and action pictures under stimulation. Overall, 73 out of the 633 stimulated cortical sites (11.5%) were associated with stimulation-induced language interferences. These interference sites were very much localized (<1 cm(2) ), and showed substantial variability across individuals in their exact localization. Stimulation interfered with both object and action naming over 44 sites, whereas it specifically interfered with object naming over 19 sites and with action naming over 10 sites. Specific object-naming sites were mainly identified in Broca's area (Brodmann area 44/45) and the temporal cortex, whereas action-naming specific sites were mainly identified in the posterior midfrontal gyrus (Brodmann area 6/9) and Broca's area (P = 0.003 by the Fisher's exact test). The anatomical loci we emphasized are in line with a cortical distinction between objects and actions based on conceptual/semantic features, so the prefrontal/premotor cortex would preferentially support sensorimotor contingencies associated with actions, whereas the temporal cortex would preferentially underpin (functional) properties of objects. Hum Brain Mapp 35:429-443, 2014. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

An iterative Multiscale Finite-Volume algorithm converging to the exact solution

The multiscale finite volume (MsFV) method has been developed to efficiently solve large heterogeneous problems (elliptic or parabolic); it is usually employed for pressure equations and delivers conservative flux fields to be used in transport problems. The method essentially relies on the hypothesis that the (fine-scale) problem can be reasonably described by a set of local solutions coupled by a conservative global (coarse-scale) problem. In most cases, the boundary conditions assigned for the local problems are satisfactory and the approximate conservative fluxes provided by the method are accurate. In numerically challenging cases, however, a more accurate localization is required to obtain a good approximation of the fine-scale solution. In this paper we develop a procedure to iteratively improve the boundary conditions of the local problems. The algorithm relies on the data structure of the MsFV method and employs a Krylov-subspace projection method to obtain an unconditionally stable scheme and accelerate convergence. Two variants are considered: in the first, only the MsFV operator is used; in the second, the MsFV operator is combined in a two-step method with an operator derived from the problem solved to construct the conservative flux field. The resulting iterative MsFV algorithms allow arbitrary reduction of the solution error without compromising the construction of a conservative flux field, which is guaranteed at any iteration. Since it converges to the exact solution, the method can be regarded as a linear solver. In this context, the schemes proposed here can be viewed as preconditioned versions of the Generalized Minimal Residual method (GMRES), with a very peculiar characteristic that the residual on the coarse grid is zero at any iteration (thus conservative fluxes can be obtained).

Reliability and validity of physiological data obtained within a cycle-run transition test in age-group triathletes.

This study examined the validity and reliability of a sequential "Run-Bike-Run" test (RBR) in age-group triathletes. Eight Olympic distance (OD) specialists (age 30.0 ± 2.0 years, mass 75.6 ± 1.6 kg, run VO2max 63.8 ± 1.9 ml· kg(-1)· min(-1), cycle VO2peak 56.7 ± 5.1 ml· kg(-1)· min(-1)) performed four trials over 10 days. Trial 1 (TRVO2max) was an incremental treadmill running test. Trials 2 and 3 (RBR1 and RBR2) involved: 1) a 7-min run at 15 km· h(-1) (R1) plus a 1-min transition to 2) cycling to fatigue (2 W· kg(-1) body mass then 30 W each 3 min); 3) 10-min cycling at 3 W· kg(-1) (Bsubmax); another 1-min transition and 4) a second 7-min run at 15 km· h(-1) (R2). Trial 4 (TT) was a 30-min cycle - 20-min run time trial. No significant differences in absolute oxygen uptake (VO2), heart rate (HR), or blood lactate concentration ([BLA]) were evidenced between RBR1 and RBR2. For all measured physiological variables, the limits of agreement were similar, and the mean differences were physiologically unimportant, between trials. Low levels of test-retest error (i.e. ICC <0.8, CV<10%) were observed for most (logged) measurements. However [BLA] post R1 (ICC 0.87, CV 25.1%), [BLA] post Bsubmax (ICC 0.99, CV 16.31) and [BLA] post R2 (ICC 0.51, CV 22.9%) were least reliable. These error ranges may help coaches detect real changes in training status over time. Moreover, RBR test variables can be used to predict discipline specific and overall TT performance. Cycle VO2peak, cycle peak power output, and the change between R1 and R2 (deltaR1R2) in [BLA] were most highly related to overall TT distance (r = 0.89, p < 0. 01; r = 0.94, p < 0.02; r = 0.86, p < 0.05, respectively). The percentage of TR VO2max at 15 km· h(-1), and deltaR1R2 HR, were also related to run TT distance (r = -0.83 and 0.86, both p < 0.05).