0 Datasets
0 Files
Get instant academic access to this publication’s datasets.
Yes. After verification, you can browse and download datasets at no cost. Some premium assets may require author approval.
Files are stored on encrypted storage. Access is restricted to verified users and all downloads are logged.
Yes, message the author after sign-up to request supplementary files or replication code.
Join 50,000+ researchers worldwide. Get instant access to peer-reviewed datasets, advanced analytics, and global collaboration tools.
✓ Immediate verification • ✓ Free institutional access • ✓ Global collaborationJoin our academic network to download verified datasets and collaborate with researchers worldwide.
Get Free AccessBackground: 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.
Philippe Persoons, Angelo Picardi, Katrin Reuter, Alasdair G Rooney, Iná S. da Silva dos Santos, Juwita Shaaban, Abbey Sidebottom, Adam Simning, Lesley Stafford, Sharon C. Sung, Pei Lin Lynnette Tan, Alyna Turner, Henk van Weert, Jennifer White, Mary A. Whooley, Kirsty Winkley, Mitsuhiko Yamada, Brett D. Thombs, Andrea Benedetti, Chi He, Brooke Levis, Kira E. Riehm, Navid Saadat, Alexander W. Levis, Marleine Azar, Danielle B. Rice, A. Krishnan, Yin Wu, Yu 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 Akena, Bruce Arroll, Liat Ayalon, Hamid Reza 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, F.H Fischer, David Fung, Bizu Gelaye, Felicity Goodyear‐Smith, Catherine G. Greeno, B.J Hall, P. A. Harrison, Martin Härter, Ulrich Hegerl, Leanne Hides, Stevan E. Hobfoll, Marie Hudson, Thomas Hyphantis, Masatoshi Inagaki, Khalida Ismail, Nathalie Jetté, Mohamad Ebrahim Khamseh, Kim M. Kiely, Y Kwan, Femke Lamers, S.-I. Liu, Manote Lotrakul, Sônia Regina Loureiro, Bernd Löwe, Laura Marsh, Anthony McGuire, Sherina Mohd Sidik, Tiago N. Munhoz, Kumiko Muramatsu, Flávia de Lima Osório, Vikram Patel, B.W Pence (2020). The Accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Algorithm for Screening to Detect Major Depression: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis. , DOI: https://doi.org/10.17615/ejch-5n22.
Datasets shared by verified academics with rich metadata and previews.
Authors choose access levels; downloads are logged for transparency.
Students and faculty get instant access after verification.
Type
Article
Year
2020
Authors
87
Datasets
0
Total Files
0
Language
en
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17615/ejch-5n22
Access datasets from 50,000+ researchers worldwide with institutional verification.
Get Free Access