Depression prevalence using the HADS-D compared to SCID major depression classification: An individual participant data meta-analysis
Fiche du document
2020
- handle: 10670/1.ookfzc
- Brehaut Eliana, Neupane Dipika, Levis Brooke, Wu Yin, Sun Ying, Krishnan Ankur, He Chen, Bhandari Parash Mani, Negeri Zelalem, Riehm Kira E., Rice Danielle B., Azar Marleine, Yan Xin Wei, Imran Mahrukh, Chiovitti Matthew J., Saadat Nazanin, Cuijpers Pim, Ioannidis John P.A., Markham Sarah, Patten Scott B., Ziegelstein Roy C., Henry Melissa, Ismail Zahinoor, Loiselle Carmen G., Mitchell Nicholas D., Tonelli Marcello, Boruff Jill T., Kloda Lorie A., Beraldi Anna, Braeken Anna P.B.M., Carter Gregory, Clover Kerrie, Conroy Ronán M., Cukor Daniel, da Rocha e Silva Carlos E., De Souza Jennifer, Downing Marina G., Feinstein Anthony, Ferentinos Panagiotis P., Fischer Felix H., Flint Alastair J., Fujimori Maiko, Gallagher Pamela, Goebel Simone, Jetté Nathalie, Julião Miguel, Keller Monika, Kjærgaard Marie, Love Anthony W., Löwe Bernd, Martin-Santos Rocio, Michopoulos Ioannis, Navines Ricard, O’Rourke Suzanne J., Öztürk Ahmet, Pintor Luis, Ponsford Jennie L., Rooney Alasdair G., Sánchez-González Roberto, Schwarzbold Marcelo L., Sharpe Michael, Simard Sébastien, Singer Susanne, Stone Jon, Tung Ka-Yee, Turner Alyna, Walker Jane, Walterfang Mark, White Jennifer, Benedetti Andrea et Thombs Brett D.. (2020). Depression prevalence using the HADS-D compared to SCID major depression classification: An individual participant data meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 139, p. 110256.
- doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.110256
Ce document est lié à :
https://constellation.uqac.ca/id/eprint/6624/
Ce document est lié à :
http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.11 [...]
Ce document est lié à :
doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.110256
Mots-clés
Psychologie Sciences de la santé depression hospital anxiety and depression scale individual participant data meta-analysis screening tools dépression données individuelles des participants méta-analyse outil de dépistageCiter ce document
Eliana Brehaut et al., « Depression prevalence using the HADS-D compared to SCID major depression classification: An individual participant data meta-analysis », Constellation - Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, ID : 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.110256
Métriques
Partage / Export
Résumé
Objectives: Validated diagnostic interviews are required to classify depression status and estimate prevalence of disorder, but screening tools are often used instead. We used individual participant data meta-analysis to compare prevalence based on standard Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – depression subscale (HADS-D) cutoffs of ≥8 and ≥11 versus Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) major depression and determined if an alternative HADS-D cutoff could more accurately estimate prevalence. Methods: We searched Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations via Ovid, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (inception-July 11, 2016) for studies comparing HADS-D scores to SCID major depression status. Pooled prevalence and pooled differences in prevalence for HADS-D cutoffs versus SCID major depression were estimated. Results: 6005 participants (689 SCID major depression cases) from 41 primary studies were included. Pooled prevalence was 24.5% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 20.5%, 29.0%) for HADS-D ≥8, 10.7% (95% CI: 8.3%, 13.8%) for HADS-D ≥11, and 11.6% (95% CI: 9.2%, 14.6%) for SCID major depression. HADS-D ≥11 was closest to SCID major depression prevalence, but the 95% prediction interval for the difference that could be expected for HADS-D ≥11 versus SCID in a new study was −21.1% to 19.5%. Conclusions: HADS-D ≥8 substantially overestimates depression prevalence. Of all possible cutoff thresholds, HADS-D ≥11 was closest to the SCID, but there was substantial heterogeneity in the difference between HADS-D ≥11 and SCID-based estimates. HADS-D should not be used as a substitute for a validated diagnostic interview.