Objectives A previous individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) identified differences in major depression classification rates between different diagnostic interviews, controlling for depressive symptoms on the basis of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. We aimed to determine whether similar results would be seen in a different population, using studies that administered the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in pregnancy or postpartum. Methods Data accrued for an EPDS diagnostic accuracy IPDMA were analysed. Binomial generalised linear mixed models were fit to compare depression classification odds for the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), controlling for EPDS scores and participant characteristics. Results Among fully structured interviews, the MINI (15 studies, 2,532 participants, 342 major depression cases) classified depression more often than the CIDI (3 studies, 2,948 participants, 194 major depression cases; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.21, 11.43]). Compared with the semistructured SCID (28 studies, 7,403 participants, 1,027 major depression cases), odds with the CIDI (interaction aOR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.85, 0.92]) and MINI (interaction aOR = 0.95, 95% CI [0.92, 0.99]) increased less as EPDS scores increased. Conclusion Different interviews may not classify major depression equivalently.

Comparison of major depression diagnostic classification probability using the SCID, CIDI, and MINI diagnostic interviews among women in pregnancy or postpartum: An individual participant data meta-analysis / Levis, B.; Mcmillan, D.; Sun, Y.; He, C.; Rice, D. B.; Krishnan, A.; Wu, Y.; Azar, M.; Sanchez, T. A.; Chiovitti, M. J.; Bhandari, P. M.; Neupane, D.; Saadat, N.; Riehm, K. E.; Imran, M.; Boruff, J. T.; Cuijpers, P.; Gilbody, S.; Ioannidis, J. P. A.; Kloda, L. A.; Patten, S. B.; Shrier, I.; Ziegelstein, R. C.; Comeau, L.; Mitchell, N. D.; Tonelli, M.; Vigod, S. N.; Aceti, F.; Alvarado, R.; Alvarado-Esquivel, C.; Bakare, M. O.; Barnes, J.; Beck, C. T.; Bindt, C.; Boyce, P. M.; Bunevicius, A.; Couto, T. C. E.; Chaudron, L. H.; Correa, H.; de Figueiredo, F. P.; Eapen, V.; Fernandes, M.; Figueiredo, B.; Fisher, J. R. W.; Garcia-Esteve, L.; Giardinelli, L.; Helle, N.; Howard, L. M.; Khalifa, D. S.; Kohlhoff, J.; Kusminskas, L.; Kozinszky, Z.; Lelli, L.; Leonardou, A. A.; Lewis, B. A.; Maes, M.; Meuti, V.; Nakic Rados, S.; Navarro Garcia, P.; Nishi, D.; Okitundu Luwa E-Andjafono, D.; Robertson-Blackmore, E.; Rochat, T. J.; Rowe, H. J.; Siu, B. W. M.; Skalkidou, A.; Stein, A.; Stewart, R. C.; Su, K. -P.; Sundstrom-Poromaa, I.; Tadinac, M.; Tandon, S. D.; Tendais, I.; Thiagayson, P.; Toreki, A.; Torres-Gimenez, A.; Tran, T. D.; Trevillion, K.; Turner, K.; Vega-Dienstmaier, J. M.; Wynter, K.; Yonkers, K. A.; Benedetti, A.; Thombs, B. D.. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF METHODS IN PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH. - ISSN 1557-0657. - 28:4(2019), p. 1803. [10.1002/mpr.1803]

Comparison of major depression diagnostic classification probability using the SCID, CIDI, and MINI diagnostic interviews among women in pregnancy or postpartum: An individual participant data meta-analysis

Sun Y.;Tonelli M.;Aceti F.;Fernandes M.;Meuti V.;
2019

Abstract

Objectives A previous individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) identified differences in major depression classification rates between different diagnostic interviews, controlling for depressive symptoms on the basis of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. We aimed to determine whether similar results would be seen in a different population, using studies that administered the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in pregnancy or postpartum. Methods Data accrued for an EPDS diagnostic accuracy IPDMA were analysed. Binomial generalised linear mixed models were fit to compare depression classification odds for the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), controlling for EPDS scores and participant characteristics. Results Among fully structured interviews, the MINI (15 studies, 2,532 participants, 342 major depression cases) classified depression more often than the CIDI (3 studies, 2,948 participants, 194 major depression cases; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.21, 11.43]). Compared with the semistructured SCID (28 studies, 7,403 participants, 1,027 major depression cases), odds with the CIDI (interaction aOR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.85, 0.92]) and MINI (interaction aOR = 0.95, 95% CI [0.92, 0.99]) increased less as EPDS scores increased. Conclusion Different interviews may not classify major depression equivalently.
2019
Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale; depressive disorders; diagnostic interviews; individual participant data meta-analysis; major depression
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01g Articolo di rassegna (Review)
Comparison of major depression diagnostic classification probability using the SCID, CIDI, and MINI diagnostic interviews among women in pregnancy or postpartum: An individual participant data meta-analysis / Levis, B.; Mcmillan, D.; Sun, Y.; He, C.; Rice, D. B.; Krishnan, A.; Wu, Y.; Azar, M.; Sanchez, T. A.; Chiovitti, M. J.; Bhandari, P. M.; Neupane, D.; Saadat, N.; Riehm, K. E.; Imran, M.; Boruff, J. T.; Cuijpers, P.; Gilbody, S.; Ioannidis, J. P. A.; Kloda, L. A.; Patten, S. B.; Shrier, I.; Ziegelstein, R. C.; Comeau, L.; Mitchell, N. D.; Tonelli, M.; Vigod, S. N.; Aceti, F.; Alvarado, R.; Alvarado-Esquivel, C.; Bakare, M. O.; Barnes, J.; Beck, C. T.; Bindt, C.; Boyce, P. M.; Bunevicius, A.; Couto, T. C. E.; Chaudron, L. H.; Correa, H.; de Figueiredo, F. P.; Eapen, V.; Fernandes, M.; Figueiredo, B.; Fisher, J. R. W.; Garcia-Esteve, L.; Giardinelli, L.; Helle, N.; Howard, L. M.; Khalifa, D. S.; Kohlhoff, J.; Kusminskas, L.; Kozinszky, Z.; Lelli, L.; Leonardou, A. A.; Lewis, B. A.; Maes, M.; Meuti, V.; Nakic Rados, S.; Navarro Garcia, P.; Nishi, D.; Okitundu Luwa E-Andjafono, D.; Robertson-Blackmore, E.; Rochat, T. J.; Rowe, H. J.; Siu, B. W. M.; Skalkidou, A.; Stein, A.; Stewart, R. C.; Su, K. -P.; Sundstrom-Poromaa, I.; Tadinac, M.; Tandon, S. D.; Tendais, I.; Thiagayson, P.; Toreki, A.; Torres-Gimenez, A.; Tran, T. D.; Trevillion, K.; Turner, K.; Vega-Dienstmaier, J. M.; Wynter, K.; Yonkers, K. A.; Benedetti, A.; Thombs, B. D.. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF METHODS IN PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH. - ISSN 1557-0657. - 28:4(2019), p. 1803. [10.1002/mpr.1803]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
MPR-28-e1803.pdf

accesso aperto

Note: Levis_Comparison of major depression diagnostic classification probability _2019
Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 428.09 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
428.09 kB Adobe PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1681763
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 18
  • Scopus 32
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 32
social impact