Comparison of major depression diagnostic classification probability using the SCID, CIDI, and MINI diagnostic interviews among women in pregnancy or postpartum: An individual participant data meta-analysis

Brooke Levis, Dean McMillan, Ying Sun, Chen He, Danielle B. Rice, Ankur Krishnan, Yin Wu, Marleine Azar, Tatiana A. Sanchez, Matthew J. Chiovitti, Parash Mani Bhandari, Dipika Neupane, Nazanin Saadat, Kira E. Riehm, Mahrukh Imran, Jill T. Boruff, Pim Cuijpers, Simon Gilbody, John P.A. Ioannidis, Lorie A. KlodaScott B. Patten, Ian Shrier, Roy C. Ziegelstein, Liane Comeau, Nicholas D. Mitchell, Marcello Tonelli, Simone N. Vigod, Franca Aceti, Rubén Alvarado, Cosme Alvarado-Esquivel, Muideen O. Bakare, Jacqueline Barnes, Cheryl Tatano Beck, Carola Bindt, Philip M. Boyce, Adomas Bunevicius, Tiago Castro e. Couto, Linda H. Chaudron, Humberto Correa, Felipe Pinheiro de Figueiredo, Valsamma Eapen, Michelle Fernandes, Barbara Figueiredo, Jane R.W. Fisher, Lluïsa Garcia-Esteve, Lisa Giardinelli, Nadine Helle, Louise M. Howard, Dina Sami Khalifa, Jane Kohlhoff, Laima Kusminskas, Zoltán Kozinszky, Lorenzo Lelli, Angeliki A. Leonardou, Beth A. Lewis, Michael Maes, Valentina Meuti, Sandra Nakić Radoš, Purificación Navarro García, Daisuke Nishi, Daniel Okitundu Luwa E-Andjafono, Emma Robertson-Blackmore, Tamsen J. Rochat, Heather J. Rowe, Bonnie W.M. Siu, Alkistis Skalkidou, Alan Stein, Robert C. Stewart, Kuan Pin Su, Inger Sundström-Poromaa, Meri Tadinac, S. Darius Tandon, Iva Tendais, Pavaani Thiagayson, Annamária Töreki, Anna Torres-Giménez, Thach D. Tran, Kylee Trevillion, Katherine Turner, Johann M. Vega-Dienstmaier, Karen Wynter, Kimberly A. Yonkers, Andrea Benedetti, Brett D. Thombs*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

10 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objectives: A previous individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) identified differences in major depression classification rates between different diagnostic interviews, controlling for depressive symptoms on the basis of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. We aimed to determine whether similar results would be seen in a different population, using studies that administered the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in pregnancy or postpartum. Methods: Data accrued for an EPDS diagnostic accuracy IPDMA were analysed. Binomial generalised linear mixed models were fit to compare depression classification odds for the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), controlling for EPDS scores and participant characteristics. Results: Among fully structured interviews, the MINI (15 studies, 2,532 participants, 342 major depression cases) classified depression more often than the CIDI (3 studies, 2,948 participants, 194 major depression cases; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.21, 11.43]). Compared with the semistructured SCID (28 studies, 7,403 participants, 1,027 major depression cases), odds with the CIDI (interaction aOR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.85, 0.92]) and MINI (interaction aOR = 0.95, 95% CI [0.92, 0.99]) increased less as EPDS scores increased. Conclusion: Different interviews may not classify major depression equivalently.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere1803
JournalInternational Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
Volume28
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2019

Keywords

  • Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale
  • depressive disorders
  • diagnostic interviews
  • individual participant data meta-analysis
  • major depression

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of major depression diagnostic classification probability using the SCID, CIDI, and MINI diagnostic interviews among women in pregnancy or postpartum: An individual participant data meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this