{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03274942878903275, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011424219345011425, 'mean_word_length': 4.972727272727273, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Screening for distress in women with breast cancer diagnosed for the first time: employment of HADS-D and PO-Bado].

OBJECTIVES
In the context of an intensification of efforts to ensure sufficient psychooncological care for breast-cancer patients, the discussion concerning valid psychometric screening instruments gains a special relevance.


METHODS
The discriminant and diagnostic validity of HADS-D and PO-Bado were investigated in a sample of 123 women with breast cancer diagnosed for the first time.


RESULTS
An ROC analysis revealed a cut-off score of greater than 9 for the subscale anxiety (sensitivity: 50%; specificity: 90%) for the use of HADS-D among breast cancer patients, whereas the recommended cut-off value was greater than 7 (sensitivity: 56%; specificity: 80%) for the subscale depression. Based on the anxiety and depression scores measured by HADS-D, 74% of the clinical cases could be classified correctly. Scores for physical and mental distress measured with PO-Bado were significantly lower in the investigated sample than in the control sample.


CONCLUSIONS
HADS-D has only a moderate sensitivity for the group at hand. PO-Bado is a comprehensive basic documentation for specific psychooncological distress, though without cut-off values it is not useful as a screening instrument.