The Accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Algorithm for Screening to Detect Major Depression: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis. Journal Articles uri icon

  •  
  • Overview
  •  
  • Research
  •  
  • Identity
  •  
  • Additional Document Info
  •  
  • View All
  •  

abstract

  • BACKGROUND: Screening for major depression with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) can be done using a cutoff or the PHQ-9 diagnostic algorithm. Many primary studies publish results for only one approach, and previous meta-analyses of the algorithm approach included only a subset of primary studies that collected data and could have published results. OBJECTIVE: To use an individual participant data meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of two PHQ-9 diagnostic algorithms for detecting major depression and compare accuracy between the algorithms and the standard PHQ-9 cutoff score of ≥10. METHODS: Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, Web of Science (January 1, 2000, to February 7, 2015). Eligible studies that classified current major depression status using a validated diagnostic interview. RESULTS: Data were included for 54 of 72 identified eligible studies (n participants = 16,688, n cases = 2,091). Among studies that used a semi-structured interview, pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) were 0.57 (0.49, 0.64) and 0.95 (0.94, 0.97) for the original algorithm and 0.61 (0.54, 0.68) and 0.95 (0.93, 0.96) for a modified algorithm. Algorithm sensitivity was 0.22-0.24 lower compared to fully structured interviews and 0.06-0.07 lower compared to the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Specificity was similar across reference standards. For PHQ-9 cutoff of ≥10 compared to semi-structured interviews, sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) were 0.88 (0.82-0.92) and 0.86 (0.82-0.88). CONCLUSIONS: The cutoff score approach appears to be a better option than a PHQ-9 algorithm for detecting major depression.

authors

  • He, Chen
  • Levis, Brooke
  • Riehm, Kira E
  • Saadat, Nazanin
  • Levis, Alexander W
  • Azar, Marleine
  • Rice, Danielle
  • Krishnan, Ankur
  • Wu, Yin
  • Sun, Ying
  • Imran, Mahrukh
  • Boruff, Jill
  • Cuijpers, Pim
  • Gilbody, Simon
  • Ioannidis, John PA
  • Kloda, Lorie A
  • McMillan, Dean
  • Patten, Scott B
  • Shrier, Ian
  • Ziegelstein, Roy C
  • Akena, Dickens H
  • Arroll, Bruce
  • Ayalon, Liat
  • Baradaran, Hamid R
  • Baron, Murray
  • Beraldi, Anna
  • Bombardier, Charles H
  • Butterworth, Peter
  • Carter, Gregory
  • Chagas, Marcos Hortes Nisihara
  • Chan, Juliana CN
  • Cholera, Rushina
  • Clover, Kerrie
  • Conwell, Yeates
  • de Man-van Ginkel, Janneke M
  • Fann, Jesse R
  • Fischer, Felix H
  • Fung, Daniel
  • Gelaye, Bizu
  • Goodyear-Smith, Felicity
  • Greeno, Catherine G
  • Hall, Brian J
  • Harrison, Patricia A
  • Härter, Martin
  • Hegerl, Ulrich
  • Hides, Leanne
  • Hobfoll, Stevan E
  • Hudson, Marie
  • Hyphantis, Thomas N
  • Inagaki, Masatoshi
  • Ismail, Khalida
  • Jetté, Nathalie
  • Khamseh, Mohammad E
  • Kiely, Kim M
  • Kwan, Yunxin
  • Lamers, Femke
  • Liu, Shen-Ing
  • Lotrakul, Manote
  • Loureiro, Sonia R
  • Löwe, Bernd
  • Marsh, Laura
  • McGuire, Anthony
  • Mohd-Sidik, Sherina
  • Munhoz, Tiago N
  • Muramatsu, Kumiko
  • Osório, Flávia L
  • Patel, Vikram
  • Pence, Brian W
  • Persoons, Philippe
  • Picardi, Angelo
  • Reuter, Katrin
  • Rooney, Alasdair G
  • da Silva Dos Santos, Iná S
  • Shaaban, Juwita
  • Sidebottom, Abbey
  • Simning, Adam
  • Stafford, Lesley
  • Sung, Sharon
  • Tan, Pei Lin Lynnette
  • Turner, Alyna
  • van Weert, Henk CPM
  • White, Jennifer
  • Whooley, Mary A
  • Winkley, Kirsty
  • Yamada, Mitsuhiko
  • Thombs, Brett D
  • Benedetti, Andrea

publication date

  • 2020