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 /

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 /

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...

Teljes leírás

Elmentve itt :
Bibliográfiai részletek
Szerzők: Lyubenova Anita
Neupane Dipika
Levis Brooke
Wu Yin
Sun Ying
He Chen
Krishnan Ankur
Bhandari Parash M.
Negeri Zelalem
Imran Mahrukh
Rice Danielle B.
Azar Marleine
Chiovitti Matthew J.
Saadat Nazanin
Riehm Kira E.
Boruff Jill T.
Ioannidis John P. A.
Cuijpers Pim
Gilbody Simon
Kloda Lorie A.
Patten Scott B.
Shrier Ian
Ziegelstein Roy C.
Comeau Liane
Mitchell Nicholas D.
Tonelli Marcello
Vigod Simone N.
Aceti Franca
Barnes Jacqueline
Bavle Amar D.
Kozinszky Zoltán
Töreki Annamária
et al
Dokumentumtípus: Cikk
Megjelent: 2021
Sorozat:INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF METHODS IN PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH 30 No. 1
Tárgyszavak:
Klinikai orvostan
doi:10.1002/mpr.1860

mtmt:31702176
Online Access:http://publicatio.bibl.u-szeged.hu/30081
Leíró adatok
Tartalmi kivonat: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.
Terjedelem/Fizikai jellemzők:13
ISSN:1049-8931

Hasonló tételek