Dataset Information

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.

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.

SUBMITTER: Levis B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7027670 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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 Brooke B McMillan Dean D Sun Ying Y He Chen C Rice Danielle B DB Krishnan Ankur A Wu Yin Y Azar Marleine M Sanchez Tatiana A TA Chiovitti Matthew J MJ Bhandari Parash Mani PM Neupane Dipika D Saadat Nazanin N Riehm Kira E KE Imran Mahrukh M Boruff Jill T JT Cuijpers Pim P Gilbody Simon S Ioannidis John P A JPA Kloda Lorie A LA Patten Scott B SB Shrier Ian I Ziegelstein Roy C RC Comeau Liane L Mitchell Nicholas D ND Tonelli Marcello M Vigod Simone N SN Aceti Franca F Alvarado Rubén R Alvarado-Esquivel Cosme C Bakare Muideen O MO Barnes Jacqueline J Beck Cheryl Tatano CT Bindt Carola C Boyce Philip M PM Bunevicius Adomas A Couto Tiago Castro E TCE Chaudron Linda H LH Correa Humberto H de Figueiredo Felipe Pinheiro FP Eapen Valsamma V Fernandes Michelle M Figueiredo Barbara B Fisher Jane R W JRW Garcia-Esteve Lluïsa L Giardinelli Lisa L Helle Nadine N Howard Louise M LM Khalifa Dina Sami DS Kohlhoff Jane J Kusminskas Laima L Kozinszky Zoltán Z Lelli Lorenzo L Leonardou Angeliki A AA Lewis Beth A BA Maes Michael M Meuti Valentina V Nakić Radoš Sandra S Navarro García Purificación P Nishi Daisuke D Okitundu Luwa E-Andjafono Daniel D Robertson-Blackmore Emma E Rochat Tamsen J TJ Rowe Heather J HJ Siu Bonnie W M BWM Skalkidou Alkistis A Stein Alan A Stewart Robert C RC Su Kuan-Pin KP Sundström-Poromaa Inger I Tadinac Meri M Tandon S Darius SD Tendais Iva I Thiagayson Pavaani P Töreki Annamária A Torres-Giménez Anna A Tran Thach D TD Trevillion Kylee K Turner Katherine K Vega-Dienstmaier Johann M JM Wynter Karen K Yonkers Kimberly A KA Benedetti Andrea A Thombs Brett D BD

International journal of methods in psychiatric research 20190930 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>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.<h4>Methods</h4>Data accrued for ...[more]

PMID: 31568624

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDifferent diagnostic interviews are used as reference standards for major depression classification in research. Semi-structured interviews involve clinical judgement, whereas fully structured interviews are completely scripted. The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), a brief fully structured interview, is also sometimes used. It is not known whether interview method is associated with probability of major depression classification.AimsTo evaluate the association between interview method and odds of major depression classification, controlling for depressive symptom scores and participant characteristics.MethodData collected for an individual participant data meta-analysis of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) diagnostic accuracy were analysed and binomial generalised linear mixed models were fit.ResultsA total of 17 158 participants (2287 with major depression) from 57 primary studies were analysed. Among fully structured interviews, odds of major depression were higher for the MINI compared with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) (odds ratio (OR) = 2.10; 95% CI = 1.15-3.87). Compared with semi-structured interviews, fully structured interviews (MINI excluded) were non-significantly more likely to classify participants with low-level depressive symptoms (PHQ-9 scores ≤6) as having major depression (OR = 3.13; 95% CI = 0.98-10.00), similarly likely for moderate-level symptoms (PHQ-9 scores 7-15) (OR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.56-1.66) and significantly less likely for high-level symptoms (PHQ-9 scores ≥16) (OR = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.26-0.97).ConclusionsThe MINI may identify more people as depressed than the CIDI, and semi-structured and fully structured interviews may not be interchangeable methods, but these results should be replicated.Declaration of interestDrs Jetté and Patten declare that they received a grant, outside the submitted work, from the Hotchkiss Brain Institute, which was jointly funded by the Institute and Pfizer. Pfizer was the original sponsor of the development of the PHQ-9, which is now in the public domain. Dr Chan is a steering committee member or consultant of Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Lilly, MSD and Pfizer. She has received sponsorships and honorarium for giving lectures and providing consultancy and her affiliated institution has received research grants from these companies. Dr Hegerl declares that within the past 3 years, he was an advisory board member for Lundbeck, Servier and Otsuka Pharma; a consultant for Bayer Pharma; and a speaker for Medice Arzneimittel, Novartis, and Roche Pharma, all outside the submitted work. Dr Inagaki declares that he has received grants from Novartis Pharma, lecture fees from Pfizer, Mochida, Shionogi, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, Daiichi-Sankyo, Meiji Seika and Takeda, and royalties from Nippon Hyoron Sha, Nanzando, Seiwa Shoten, Igaku-shoin and Technomics, all outside of the submitted work. Dr Yamada reports personal fees from Meiji Seika Pharma Co., Ltd., MSD K.K., Asahi Kasei Pharma Corporation, Seishin Shobo, Seiwa Shoten Co., Ltd., Igaku-shoin Ltd., Chugai Igakusha and Sentan Igakusha, all outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests. No funder had any role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data; preparation, review or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Project description:Background & aimsMagnetic resonance elastography (MRE) is a noninvasive tool for staging liver fibrosis. We conducted a meta-analysis of individual participant data collected from published studies to assess the diagnostic accuracy of MRE for staging liver fibrosis in patients with chronic liver diseases (CLD).MethodsThrough a systematic literature search of multiple databases (2003-2013), we identified studies on diagnostic performance of MRE for staging liver fibrosis in patients with CLD with native anatomy, using liver biopsy as the standard. We contacted study authors to collect data on each participant's age, sex, body mass index (BMI), liver stiffness (measured by MRE), fibrosis stage, staging system used, degree of inflammation, etiology of CLD, and interval between MRE and biopsy. Through a pooled analysis, we calculated cluster-adjusted area under the receiver-operating curve, sensitivity, and specificity of MRE for any fibrosis (≥stage 1), significant fibrosis (≥stage 2), advanced fibrosis (≥stage 3), and cirrhosis (stage 4).ResultsWe analyzed data from 12 retrospective studies, comprising 697 patients (mean age, 55 ± 13 y; 59.4% male; mean BMI, 26.9 ± 6.7 kg/m(2); 92.1% with <1 year interval between MRE and biopsy; and 47.1% with hepatitis C). Overall, 19.5%, 19.4%, 15.5%, 15.9%, and 29.7% patients had stage 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 fibrosis, respectively. The mean area under the receiver-operating curve values (and 95% confidence intervals) for the diagnosis of any (≥stage 1), significant (≥stage 2), advanced fibrosis (≥stage 3), and cirrhosis, were as follows: 0.84 (0.76-0.92), 0.88 (0.84-0.91), 0.93 (0.90-0.95), and 0.92 (0.90-0.94), respectively. A similar diagnostic performance was observed in stratified analysis based on sex, obesity, and etiology of CLD. The overall rate of failure of MRE was 4.3%.ConclusionsBased on a pooled analysis of data from individual participants, MRE has a high accuracy for the diagnosis of significant or advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis, independent of BMI and etiology of CLD. Prospective studies are warranted to better understand the diagnostic performance of MRE.

Dataset Information

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.

Publications

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.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets