Browsing by Author "Sherina Mohd-Sidik"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    PublicationMetadata only
    The Accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Algorithm for Screening to Detect Major Depression: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis
    (2020-01-01) Chen He; Brooke Levis; Kira E. Riehm; Nazanin Saadat; Alexander W. Levis; Marleine Azar; Danielle B. Rice; Ankur Krishnan; Yin Wu; Ying 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 H. Akena; Bruce Arroll; Liat Ayalon; Hamid R. 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; Felix H. Fischer; Daniel Fung; Bizu Gelaye; Felicity Goodyear-Smith; Catherine G. Greeno; Brian J. Hall; Patricia A. Harrison; Martin Härter; Ulrich Hegerl; Leanne Hides; Stevan E. Hobfoll; Marie Hudson; Thomas N. Hyphantis; Masatoshi Inagaki; Khalida Ismail; Nathalie Jetté; Mohammad E. Khamseh; Kim M. Kiely; Yunxin Kwan; Femke Lamers; Shen Ing Liu; Manote Lotrakul; Sonia R. Loureiro; Bernd Löwe; Laura Marsh; Anthony McGuire; Sherina Mohd-Sidik; Tiago N. Munhoz; Kumiko Muramatsu; Flávia L. Osório; Vikram Patel; Brian W. Pence; Philippe Persoons; Angelo Picardi; Katrin Reuter; Alasdair G. Rooney; Iná S. Da Silva Dos Santos; Juwita Shaaban; Abbey Sidebottom; Adam Simning; Lesley Stafford; Sharon Sung; Pei Lin Lynnette Tan; Alyna Turner; Henk C.P.M. Van Weert; Jennifer White; Mary A. Whooley; Kirsty Winkley; Mitsuhiko Yamada; Brett D. Thombs; Andrea Benedetti; Melbourne Institute; Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences; San Francisco VA Health Care System; Mackay Medical College; Calvary Mater Newcastle; Duke-NUS Medical School Singapore; City of Minneapolis; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Australia; Niigata Seiryo University; Bar-Ilan University School of Social Work; Makerere University; Concordia University; University Medical Center Utrecht; Royal Women's Hospital, Carlton; Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; KU Leuven– University Hospital Leuven; University of Queensland; Mackay Memorial Hospital Taiwan; University of New South Wales (UNSW) Australia; University of Edinburgh; Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine; Shimane University; Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin; Universiti Putra Malaysia; The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; KU Leuven; Iran University of Medical Sciences; Prince of Wales Hospital Hong Kong; University of Rochester Medical Center; University of California, San Francisco; Neuroscience Research Australia; Universidade de Macau; Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research; UNC School of Medicine; Technical University of Munich; Monash University; Deakin University; National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry Kodaira; University of Newcastle, Faculty of Health and Medicine; University of York; Saint Joseph's College of Maine; Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University; University of Aberdeen; University of Pittsburgh; University of Washington, Seattle; Universidade Federal de Pelotas; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai; Stanford University; King's College London; Istituto Superiore Di Sanita; Singapore Institute of Mental Health; Australian National University; Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main; Centre universitaire de santé McGill; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health; University of Auckland; Nanyang Technological University; Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf und Medizinische Fakultät; Panepistimion Ioanninon; Chinese University of Hong Kong; Harvard Medical School; School of Medical Sciences - Universiti Sains Malaysia; McGill University; Tan Tock Seng Hospital; Baylor College of Medicine; University of Calgary; Amsterdam UMC - University of Amsterdam; Johns Hopkins School of Medicine; Private Practice for Psychotherapy and Psycho-oncology; STAR-Stress; National Institute of Science and Technology; Allina Health
    © 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel. All rights reserved. Background: 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.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    PublicationMetadata only
    Equivalency of the diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9: A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis
    (2020-06-01) Yin Wu; Yin Wu; Yin Wu; Brooke Levis; Kira E. Riehm; Nazanin Saadat; Alexander W. Levis; Marleine Azar; Danielle B. Rice; Danielle B. Rice; Jill Boruff; Pim Cuijpers; Simon Gilbody; John P.A. Ioannidis; Lorie A. Kloda; Dean McMillan; Scott B. Patten; Scott B. Patten; Ian Shrier; Ian Shrier; Roy C. Ziegelstein; Dickens H. Akena; Bruce Arroll; Liat Ayalon; Hamid R. Baradaran; Hamid R. Baradaran; Murray Baron; Murray Baron; Charles H. Bombardier; Peter Butterworth; Peter Butterworth; Gregory Carter; Marcos H. Chagas; Juliana C.N. Chan; Juliana C.N. Chan; Juliana C.N. Chan; Rushina Cholera; Yeates Conwell; Janneke M. De Man-Van Ginkel; Jesse R. Fann; Felix H. Fischer; Daniel Fung; Daniel Fung; Daniel Fung; Daniel Fung; Bizu Gelaye; Felicity Goodyear-Smith; Catherine G. Greeno; Brian J. Hall; Brian J. Hall; Patricia A. Harrison; Martin Härter; Ulrich Hegerl; Leanne Hides; Stevan E. Hobfoll; Marie Hudson; Marie Hudson; Thomas Hyphantis; Masatoshi Inagaki; Nathalie Jetté; Nathalie Jetté; Nathalie Jetté; Mohammad E. Khamseh; Kim M. Kiely; Kim M. Kiely; Yunxin Kwan; Femke Lamers; Shen Ing Liu; Shen Ing Liu; Shen Ing Liu; Shen Ing Liu; Manote Lotrakul; Sonia R. Loureiro; Bernd Löwe; Anthony McGuire; Sherina Mohd-Sidik; Tiago N. Munhoz; Kumiko Muramatsu; Flávia L. Osório; Flávia L. Osório; Vikram Patel; Vikram Patel; Brian W. Pence; Philippe Persoons; Philippe Persoons; Angelo Picardi; Katrin Reuter; Alasdair G. Rooney; Iná S. Santos; Juwita Shaaban; Abbey Sidebottom; Adam Simning; Lesley Stafford; Lesley Stafford; Sharon Sung; Sharon Sung; Pei Lin Lynnette Tan; Alyna Turner; Alyna Turner; Melbourne Institute; Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences; Mackay Medical College; Duke-NUS Medical School Singapore; City of Minneapolis; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Australia; Niigata Seiryo University; Makerere University; Concordia University; University Medical Center Utrecht; Royal Women's Hospital, Carlton; Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; KU Leuven– University Hospital Leuven; The University of Queensland; Mackay Memorial Hospital Taiwan; University of New South Wales (UNSW) Australia; The University of Edinburgh; Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine; Shimane University; Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin; Universiti Putra Malaysia; The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; KU Leuven; Iran University of Medical Sciences; Universitäts Klinikum Freiburg und Medizinische Fakultät; Prince of Wales Hospital Hong Kong; University of Rochester Medical Center; Neuroscience Research Australia; Universidade de Macau; Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research; UNC School of Medicine; Deakin University; University of Newcastle, Faculty of Health and Medicine; University of York; Saint Joseph's College of Maine; Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University; University of Pittsburgh; University of Washington, Seattle; Universidade Federal de Pelotas; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai; Stanford University; University of Aberdeen School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition; Istituto Superiore Di Sanita; Singapore Institute of Mental Health; The Australian National University; Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; Universidade de Sao Paulo - USP; Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main; University of Auckland; Nanyang Technological University; Johns Hopkins University; Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf und Medizinische Fakultät; Panepistimion Ioanninon; Chinese University of Hong Kong; Bar-Ilan University; Harvard Medical School; School of Medical Sciences - Universiti Sains Malaysia; McGill University; Tan Tock Seng Hospital; University of Calgary; STAR-Stress; National Institute of Science and Technology; Allina Health
    Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019. Item 9 of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) queries about thoughts of death and self-harm, but not suicidality. Although it is sometimes used to assess suicide risk, most positive responses are not associated with suicidality. The PHQ-8, which omits Item 9, is thus increasingly used in research. We assessed equivalency of total score correlations and the diagnostic accuracy to detect major depression of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9.Methods We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis. We fit bivariate random-effects models to assess diagnostic accuracy.Results 16 742 participants (2097 major depression cases) from 54 studies were included. The correlation between PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 scores was 0.996 (95% confidence interval 0.996 to 0.996). The standard cutoff score of 10 for the PHQ-9 maximized sensitivity + specificity for the PHQ-8 among studies that used a semi-structured diagnostic interview reference standard (N = 27). At cutoff 10, the PHQ-8 was less sensitive by 0.02 (-0.06 to 0.00) and more specific by 0.01 (0.00 to 0.01) among those studies (N = 27), with similar results for studies that used other types of interviews (N = 27). For all 54 primary studies combined, across all cutoffs, the PHQ-8 was less sensitive than the PHQ-9 by 0.00 to 0.05 (0.03 at cutoff 10), and specificity was within 0.01 for all cutoffs (0.00 to 0.01).Conclusions PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 total scores were similar. Sensitivity may be minimally reduced with the PHQ-8, but specificity is similar.