Dataset Information

Diagnostic accuracy of case-finding questions to identify perinatal depression.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Guidelines for perinatal mental health care recommend the use of two case-finding questions about depressed feelings and loss of interest in activities, despite the absence of validation studies in this context. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of these questions and of a third question about the need for help asked of women receiving perinatal care.

Methods

We evaluated self-reported responses to two case-finding questions against an interviewer-assessed diagnostic standard (DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder) among 152 women receiving antenatal care at 26-28 weeks' gestation and postnatal care at 5-13 weeks after delivery. Among women who answered "yes" to either question, we assessed the usefulness of asking a third question about the need for help. We calculated sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios for the two case-finding questions and for the added question about the need for help.

Results

Antenatally, the two case-finding questions had a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 77%-100%), a specificity of 68% (95% CI 58%-76%), a positive likelihood ratio of 3.03 (95% CI 2.28-4.02) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.041 (95% CI 0.003-0.63) in identifying perinatal depression. Postnatal results were similar. Among the women who screened positive antenatally, the additional question about the need for help had a sensitivity of 58% (95% CI 38%-76%), a specificity of 91% (95% CI 78%-97%), a positive likelihood ratio of 6.86 (95% CI 2.16-21.7) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.45 (95% CI 0.25-0.80), with lower sensitivity and higher specificity postnatally.

Interpretation

Negative responses to both of the case-finding questions showed acceptable accuracy for ruling out perinatal depression. For positive responses, the use of a third question about the need for help improved specificity and the ability to rule in depression.

SUBMITTER: Mann R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3348219 | biostudies-literature | 2012 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Diagnostic accuracy of case-finding questions to identify perinatal depression.

Mann Rachel R Adamson Joy J Gilbody Simon M SM

CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne 20120326 8

<h4>Background</h4>Guidelines for perinatal mental health care recommend the use of two case-finding questions about depressed feelings and loss of interest in activities, despite the absence of validation studies in this context. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of these questions and of a third question about the need for help asked of women receiving perinatal care.<h4>Methods</h4>We evaluated self-reported responses to two case-finding questions against an interviewer-assessed diagnostic ...[more]

PMID: 22451686

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) including physical, sexual and emotional violence, causes short and long term ill-health. Brief questions that reliably identify women experiencing IPV who present in clinical settings are a pre-requisite for an appropriate response from health services to this substantial public health problem. We estimated the sensitivity and specificity of four questions (HARK) developed from the Abuse Assessment screen, compared to a 30-item abuse questionnaire, the Composite Abuse Scale (CAS). METHODS: We administered the four HARK questions and the CAS to women approached by two researchers in general practice waiting rooms in Newham, east London. Inclusions: women aged more than 17 years waiting to see a doctor or nurse, who had been in an intimate relationship in the last year. EXCLUSIONS: women who were accompanied by children over four years of age or another adult, too unwell to complete the questionnaires, unable to understand English or unable to give informed consent. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty two women were recruited. The response rate was 54%. The prevalence of current intimate partner violence, within the last 12 months, using the CAS cut off score of >or=3, was 23% (95% C.I. 17% to 28%) with pre-test odds of 0.3 (95% C.I. 0.2 to 0.4). The receiver operator characteristic curve demonstrated that a HARK cut off score of >or=1 maximises the true positives whilst minimising the false positives. The sensitivity of the optimal HARK cut-off score of >or=1 was 81% (95% C.I. 69% to 90%), specificity 95% (95% C.I. 91% to 98%), positive predictive value 83% (95% C.I. 70% to 91%), negative predictive value 94% (95% C.I. 90% to 97%), likelihood ratio 16 (95% C.I. 8 to 31) and post-test odds 5. CONCLUSION: The four HARK questions accurately identify women experiencing IPV in the past year and may help women disclose abuse in general practice. The HARK questions could be incorporated into the electronic medical record in primary care to prompt clinicians to ask about recent partner violence and to encourage disclosure by patients. Future research should test the effectiveness of HARK in clinical consultations.

Project description:ObjectivesTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of postmortem magnetic resonance imaging (PM-MRI) and postmortem ultrasound (PM-US) for perinatal autopsy in the same patient cohort, and to determine whether PM-US can provide the same anatomical information as PM-MRI.MethodsIn this prospective, 5-year (July 2014-July 2019) single-center study, we performed 1.5-T PM-MRI and PM-US in an unselected cohort of perinatal deaths. The diagnostic accuracies of both modalities were calculated, using autopsy as the reference standard. As a secondary objective, the concordance rates between the two imaging modalities for the overall main diagnosis and for five anatomical regions (brain, spine, thorax, heart and abdomen) were calculated.ResultsDuring the study period, 136 cases underwent both PM-US and PM-MRI, of which 88 (64.7%) also underwent autopsy. There was no significant difference in the rates of concordance with autopsy between the two modalities for overall diagnosis (PM-US, 86.4% (95% CI, 77.7-92.0%) vs PM-MRI, 88.6% (95% CI, 80.3-93.7%)) or in the sensitivities and specificities for individual anatomical regions. There were more non-diagnostic PM-US than PM-MRI examinations for the brain (22.8% vs 3.7%) and heart (14.7% vs 5.1%). If an 'imaging-only' autopsy had been performed, PM-US would have achieved the same diagnosis as 1.5-T PM-MRI in 86.8% (95% CI, 80.0-91.5%) of cases, with the highest rates of agreement being for spine (99.3% (95% CI, 95.9-99.9%)) and cardiac (97.3% (95% CI, 92.4-99.1%)) findings and the lowest being for brain diagnoses (85.2% (95% CI, 76.9-90.8%)).ConclusionAlthough there were fewer non-diagnostic cases using PM-MRI than for PM-US, the high concordance rate for overall diagnosis suggests that PM-US could be used for triaging cases when PM-MRI access is limited or unavailable. © 2020 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Project description:BackgroundEarly identification of patients with chronic conditions and complex health needs in emergency departments (ED) would enable the provision of services better suited to their needs, such as case management. A case-finding tool would ultimately support ED teams to this end and could reduce the cost of services due to avoidable ED visits and hospitalizations. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a short self-administered case-finding tool in EDs to identify patients with chronic conditions and complex health needs in an adult population.MethodsThis prospective development and initial validation study of a case-finding tool was conducted in four EDs in the province of Quebec (Canada). Adult patients with chronic conditions were approached at their third or more visit to the ED within 12 months to complete a self-administered questionnaire, which included socio-demographics, a comorbidity index, the reference standard INTERMED self-assessment, and 12 questions to develop the case-finding tool. Significant variables in bivariate analysis were included in a multivariate logistic regression analysis and a backward elimination procedure was applied. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was developed to identify the most appropriate threshold score to identify patients with complex health needs.ResultsTwo hundred ninety patients participated in the study. The multivariate analysis yielded a six-question tool, COmplex NEeds Case-finding Tool - 6 (CONECT-6), which evaluates the following variables: low perceived health; limitations due to pain; unmet needs; high self-perceived complexity; low income; and poor social support. With a threshold of two or more positive answers, the sensitivity was 90% and specificity 66%. The positive and negative predictive values were 49 and 75% respectively.ConclusionsThe case-finding process is the essential characteristic of case management effectiveness. This study presents the first case-finding tool to identify adult patients with chronic conditions and complex health needs in ED.

Dataset Information

Diagnostic accuracy of case-finding questions to identify perinatal depression.

Background

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Diagnostic accuracy of case-finding questions to identify perinatal depression.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets