The Accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Algorithm for Screening to Detect Major Depression: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis
Version 2 2024-06-03, 07:12Version 2 2024-06-03, 07:12
Version 1 2019-11-18, 15:58Version 1 2019-11-18, 15:58
journal contribution
posted on 2024-06-03, 07:12authored byC He, B Levis, KE Riehm, N Saadat, AW Levis, M Azar, DB Rice, A Krishnan, Y Wu, Y Sun, M Imran, J Boruff, P Cuijpers, S Gilbody, JPA Ioannidis, LA Kloda, D McMillan, SB Patten, I Shrier, RC Ziegelstein, DH Akena, B Arroll, L Ayalon, HR Baradaran, M Baron, A Beraldi, CH Bombardier, Peter ButterworthPeter Butterworth, G Carter, MHN Chagas, JCN Chan, R Cholera, K Clover, Y Conwell, JM De Man-Van Ginkel, JR Fann, FH Fischer, D Fung, B Gelaye, F Goodyear-Smith, CG Greeno, BJ Hall, PA Harrison, M Härter, U Hegerl, L Hides, SE Hobfoll, M Hudson, TN Hyphantis, M Inagaki, K Ismail, N Jetté, ME Khamseh, KM Kiely, Y Kwan, F Lamers, SI Liu, M Lotrakul, SR Loureiro, B Löwe, L Marsh, A McGuire, S Mohd-Sidik, TN Munhoz, K Muramatsu, FL Osório, V Patel, BW Pence, P Persoons, A Picardi, K Reuter, AG Rooney, IS Da Silva Dos Santos, J Shaaban, A Sidebottom, A Simning, L Stafford, S Sung, PLL Tan, Alyna TurnerAlyna Turner, HCPM Van Weert, J White, MA Whooley, K Winkley, M Yamada, BD Thombs, A Benedetti
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.