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

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

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.

Bibliografische Daten

OriginalspracheEnglisch
ISSN0033-3190
DOIs
StatusVeröffentlicht - 2020

Anmerkungen des Dekanats

© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.

PubMed 31593971