BIROn - Birkbeck Institutional Research Online

    Probability of major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI and MINI diagnostic interviews: a synthesis of three individual participant data meta-analyses

    Wu, Yin and Levis, B. and Ioannidis, P.A. and Benedetti, A. and Thombs, B.D. (2020) 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 90 (1), pp. 28-40. ISSN 0033-3190.

    [img] Text
    Wu et al. - Psychother Psychosom (2020).pdf - Published Version of Record
    Restricted to Repository staff only

    Download (207kB)

    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.

    Metadata

    Item Type: Article
    School: Birkbeck Faculties and Schools > Faculty of Science > School of Psychological Sciences
    Depositing User: Jacqueline Barnes
    Date Deposited: 01 Feb 2024 16:07
    Last Modified: 02 Feb 2024 07:29
    URI: https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/52767

    Statistics

    Activity Overview
    6 month trend
    1Download
    6 month trend
    41Hits

    Additional statistics are available via IRStats2.

    Archive Staff Only (login required)

    Edit/View Item
    Edit/View Item