View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Depression prevalence based on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale compared to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM DIsorders classification: Systematic review and individual participant data meta‐analysis.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Depression prevalence based on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale compared to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM DIsorders classification: Systematic review and individual participant data meta‐analysis.
Authors: Lyubenova, Anita (AUTHOR), Neupane, Dipika (AUTHOR), Levis, Brooke (AUTHOR), Wu, Yin (AUTHOR), Sun, Ying (AUTHOR), He, Chen (AUTHOR), Krishnan, Ankur (AUTHOR), Bhandari, Parash M. (AUTHOR), Negeri, Zelalem (AUTHOR), Imran, Mahrukh (AUTHOR), Rice, Danielle B. (AUTHOR), Azar, Marleine (AUTHOR), Chiovitti, Matthew J. (AUTHOR), Saadat, Nazanin (AUTHOR), Riehm, Kira E. (AUTHOR), Boruff, Jill T. (AUTHOR), Ioannidis, John P. A. (AUTHOR), Cuijpers, Pim (AUTHOR), Gilbody, Simon (AUTHOR), Kloda, Lorie A. (AUTHOR)
Source: International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research. Mar2021, Vol. 30 Issue 1, p1-13. 13p. 1 Diagram, 1 Chart, 2 Graphs.
Subjects: Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, Mental depression
Abstract: Objectives: Estimates of depression prevalence in pregnancy and postpartum are based on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) more than on any other method. We aimed to determine if any EPDS cutoff can accurately and consistently estimate depression prevalence in individual studies. Methods: We analyzed datasets that compared EPDS scores to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) major depression status. Random‐effects meta‐analysis was used to compare prevalence with EPDS cutoffs versus the SCID. Results: Seven thousand three hundred and fifteen participants (1017 SCID major depression) from 29 primary studies were included. For EPDS cutoffs used to estimate prevalence in recent studies (≥9 to ≥14), pooled prevalence estimates ranged from 27.8% (95% CI: 22.0%–34.5%) for EPDS ≥ 9 to 9.0% (95% CI: 6.8%–11.9%) for EPDS ≥ 14; pooled SCID major depression prevalence was 9.0% (95% CI: 6.5%–12.3%). EPDS ≥14 provided pooled prevalence closest to SCID‐based prevalence but differed from SCID prevalence in individual studies by a mean absolute difference of 5.1% (95% prediction interval: −13.7%, 12.3%). Conclusion: EPDS ≥14 approximated SCID‐based prevalence overall, but considerable heterogeneity in individual studies is a barrier to using it for prevalence estimation. [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.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 149466339
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Depression prevalence based on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale compared to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM DIsorders classification: Systematic review and individual participant data meta‐analysis.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lyubenova%2C+Anita%22">Lyubenova, Anita</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Neupane%2C+Dipika%22">Neupane, Dipika</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Levis%2C+Brooke%22">Levis, Brooke</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wu%2C+Yin%22">Wu, Yin</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sun%2C+Ying%22">Sun, Ying</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22He%2C+Chen%22">He, Chen</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Krishnan%2C+Ankur%22">Krishnan, Ankur</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bhandari%2C+Parash+M%2E%22">Bhandari, Parash M.</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Negeri%2C+Zelalem%22">Negeri, Zelalem</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Imran%2C+Mahrukh%22">Imran, Mahrukh</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Rice%2C+Danielle+B%2E%22">Rice, Danielle B.</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Azar%2C+Marleine%22">Azar, Marleine</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chiovitti%2C+Matthew+J%2E%22">Chiovitti, Matthew J.</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Saadat%2C+Nazanin%22">Saadat, Nazanin</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Riehm%2C+Kira+E%2E%22">Riehm, Kira E.</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Boruff%2C+Jill+T%2E%22">Boruff, Jill T.</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ioannidis%2C+John+P%2E+A%2E%22">Ioannidis, John P. A.</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cuijpers%2C+Pim%22">Cuijpers, Pim</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Gilbody%2C+Simon%22">Gilbody, Simon</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kloda%2C+Lorie+A%2E%22">Kloda, Lorie A.</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22International+Journal+of+Methods+in+Psychiatric+Research%22">International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research</searchLink>. Mar2021, Vol. 30 Issue 1, p1-13. 13p. 1 Diagram, 1 Chart, 2 Graphs.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Edinburgh+Postnatal+Depression+Scale%22">Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mental+depression%22">Mental depression</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Objectives: Estimates of depression prevalence in pregnancy and postpartum are based on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) more than on any other method. We aimed to determine if any EPDS cutoff can accurately and consistently estimate depression prevalence in individual studies. Methods: We analyzed datasets that compared EPDS scores to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) major depression status. Random‐effects meta‐analysis was used to compare prevalence with EPDS cutoffs versus the SCID. Results: Seven thousand three hundred and fifteen participants (1017 SCID major depression) from 29 primary studies were included. For EPDS cutoffs used to estimate prevalence in recent studies (≥9 to ≥14), pooled prevalence estimates ranged from 27.8% (95% CI: 22.0%–34.5%) for EPDS ≥ 9 to 9.0% (95% CI: 6.8%–11.9%) for EPDS ≥ 14; pooled SCID major depression prevalence was 9.0% (95% CI: 6.5%–12.3%). EPDS ≥14 provided pooled prevalence closest to SCID‐based prevalence but differed from SCID prevalence in individual studies by a mean absolute difference of 5.1% (95% prediction interval: −13.7%, 12.3%). Conclusion: EPDS ≥14 approximated SCID‐based prevalence overall, but considerable heterogeneity in individual studies is a barrier to using it for prevalence estimation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>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.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=149466339
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/mpr.1860
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 13
        StartPage: 1
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mental depression
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Depression prevalence based on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale compared to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM DIsorders classification: Systematic review and individual participant data meta‐analysis.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lyubenova, Anita
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Neupane, Dipika
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Levis, Brooke
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wu, Yin
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sun, Ying
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: He, Chen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Krishnan, Ankur
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Bhandari, Parash M.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Negeri, Zelalem
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Imran, Mahrukh
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Rice, Danielle B.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Azar, Marleine
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chiovitti, Matthew J.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Saadat, Nazanin
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Riehm, Kira E.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Boruff, Jill T.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ioannidis, John P. A.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cuijpers, Pim
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Gilbody, Simon
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kloda, Lorie A.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Text: Mar2021
              Type: published
              Y: 2021
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 10498931
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 30
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
              Type: main
ResultId 1