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.
Saved in:
| Title: | 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. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Levis, Brooke (AUTHOR), McMillan, Dean (AUTHOR), Sun, Ying (AUTHOR), He, Chen (AUTHOR), Rice, Danielle B. (AUTHOR), Krishnan, Ankur (AUTHOR), Wu, Yin (AUTHOR), Azar, Marleine (AUTHOR), Sanchez, Tatiana A. (AUTHOR), Chiovitti, Matthew J. (AUTHOR), Bhandari, Parash Mani (AUTHOR), Neupane, Dipika (AUTHOR), Saadat, Nazanin (AUTHOR), Riehm, Kira E. (AUTHOR), Imran, Mahrukh (AUTHOR), Boruff, Jill T. (AUTHOR), Cuijpers, Pim (AUTHOR), Gilbody, Simon (AUTHOR), Ioannidis, John P.A. (AUTHOR), Kloda, Lorie A. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research. Dec2019, Vol. 28 Issue 4, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p. 1 Diagram, 1 Chart, 1 Graph. |
| Subjects: | Mental depression, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, Interviewing |
| 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
Be the first to leave a comment!
