Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: 10.1159/000509283
Title: Probability of Major Depression Classification Based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI Diagnostic Interviews : A Synthesis of Three Individual Participant Data Meta-Analyses
Authors: Wu, Yin
DEPRESsion Screening Data (DEPRESSD) Collaboration
Rancāns, Elmārs
Department of Psychiatry and Narcology
Keywords: Classification;Depressive disorders;Diagnostic interviews;Individual participant data meta-analysis;Major depression;3.2 Clinical medicine;1.1. Scientific article indexed in Web of Science and/or Scopus database;Clinical Psychology;Applied Psychology;Psychiatry and Mental health;SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
Issue Date: 2021
Citation: Wu , Y , DEPRESsion Screening Data (DEPRESSD) Collaboration & Rancāns , E 2021 , ' Probability of Major Depression Classification Based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI Diagnostic Interviews : A Synthesis of Three Individual Participant Data Meta-Analyses ' , Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics , vol. 90 , no. 1 , pp. 28-40 . https://doi.org/10.1159/000509283
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Three previous individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) reported that, compared to the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM (SCID), alternative reference standards, primarily the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), tended to misclassify major depression status, when controlling for depression symptom severity. However, there was an important lack of precision in the results. OBJECTIVE: To compare the odds of the major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI. METHODS: We included and standardized data from 3 IPDMA databases. For each IPDMA, separately, we fitted binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of major depression classification, controlling for symptom severity and characteristics of participants, and the interaction between interview and symptom severity. Next, we synthesized results using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: In total, 69,405 participants (7,574 [11%] with major depression) from 212 studies were included. Controlling for symptom severity and participant characteristics, the MINI (74 studies; 25,749 participants) classified major depression more often than the SCID (108 studies; 21,953 participants; aOR 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.92]). Classification odds for the CIDI (30 studies; 21,703 participants) and the SCID did not differ overall (aOR 1.19; 95% CI 0.79-1.75); however, as screening scores increased, the aOR increased less for the CIDI than the SCID (interaction aOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the SCID, the MINI classified major depression more often. The odds of the depression classification with the CIDI increased less as symptom levels increased. Interpretation of research that uses diagnostic interviews to classify depression should consider the interview characteristics.
Description: Funding Information: This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (KRS-134297, PCG-155468, PJT-162206, KRS-140994, KRS-144045). Drs. Wu and Levis were supported by Fonds de recherche du Québec – Santé (FRQS) Postdoctoral Training Fellowships. Dr. Benedetti was supported by a FRQS researcher salary award. Publisher Copyright: © 2020 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
DOI: 10.1159/000509283
ISSN: 0033-3190
Appears in Collections:Research outputs from Pure / Zinātniskās darbības rezultāti no ZDIS Pure

Files in This Item:


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.