Dipika NeupaneBrooke LevisParash M. BhandariBrett D. ThombsAndrea BenedettiYing SunChen HeYin WuAnkur KrishnanZelalem NegeriMahrukh ImranDanielle B. RiceKira E. RiehmNazanin SaadatMarleine AzarTatiana A. SanchezMatthew J. ChiovittiAlexander W. LevisJill T. BoruffPim CuijpersSimon GilbodyJohn P.A. IoannidisLorie A. KlodaScott B. PattenIan ShrierRoy C. ZiegelsteinLiane ComeauNicholas D. MitchellMarcello TonelliSimone N. VigodDickens H. AkenaRubén AlvaradoBruce ArrollMuideen O. BakareHamid R. BaradaranCheryl Tatano BeckCharles H. BombardierAdomas BuneviciusGregory CarterMarcos H. ChagasLinda H. ChaudronRushina CholeraKerrie CloverYeates ConwellTiago Castro e CoutoJanneke M. de Man-van GinkelJaime DelgadilloJesse R. FannNicolas FavezDaniel FungLluïsa Garcia-EsteveBizu GelayeFelicity Goodyear-SmithThomas HyphantisMasatoshi InagakiKhalida IsmailNathalie JettéDina Sami KhalifaMohammad E. KhamsehJane KohlhoffZoltán KozinszkyLaima KusminskasShen Ing LiuManote LotrakulSonia R. LoureiroBernd LöweSherina Mohd SidikSandra Nakić RadošFlávia L. OsórioSusan J. PawlbyBrian W. PenceTamsen J. RochatAlasdair G. RooneyDeborah J. SharpLesley StaffordKuan Pin SuSharon C. SungMeri TadinacS. Darius TandonPavaani ThiagaysonAnnamária TörekiAnna Torres-GiménezAlyna TurnerChristina M. van der Feltz-CornelisJohann M. Vega-DienstmaierPaul A. VöhringerJennifer WhiteMary A. WhooleyKirsty WinkleyMitsuhiko YamadaRamathibodi HospitalMakerere University College of Health SciencesSchool of MedicineSchool of Medicine and Public HealthBristol Medical SchoolLietuvos sveikatos mokslų universitetasDuke-NUS Medical SchoolUniversidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Facultad de Medicina Alberto HurtadoUniversity of New South Wales Faculty of Medicine, School of PsychiatryUniversity of the Witwatersrand Faculty of Health SciencesConcordia UniversityStanford University School of MedicineUniversity Medical Center UtrechtRoyal Women's Hospital, CarltonHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthChina Medical University HospitalUniversity of AlbertaHospital Clinic BarcelonaMcGill Faculty of Medicine and Health SciencesFaculty of MedicineSzegedi Tudományegyetem (SZTE)The University of EdinburghDanderyds SjukhusUniversiti Putra MalaysiaThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillIran University of Medical SciencesUniversity of Rochester Medical CenterUniversity of California, San FranciscoLady Davis Institute for Medical ResearchMonash UniversityKeele University, School of MedicineNational Center of Neurology and Psychiatry KodairaUniversity of Newcastle, Faculty of Health and MedicineUniversity of TorontoUniversity of YorkUniversity of WashingtonUniversidade Federal de UberlândiaNorthwestern University Feinberg School of MedicineUniversity of Rochester School of Medicine and DentistryHospital Clínico Universidad De ChileKing's College LondonUniversity of MontrealSingapore Institute of Mental HealthShimane University Faculty of MedicineUniversity of ZagrebSchool of NursingUniversidade de São PauloCentre Universitaire de Santé McGillThe University of AucklandDuke University School of MedicineUniversitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfUniversité de GenèveMedisinske FakultetFacultad de Medicina de la Universidad de ChileUniversité McGillUniversiteit van AmsterdamUniversity of CalgaryThe University of SheffieldJohns Hopkins School of MedicineCumming School of MedicinePrivate PracticeFederal Neuropsychiatric HospitalCatholic University of Croatia2022-08-042022-08-042021-09-01International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research. Vol.30, No.3 (2021)15570657104989312-s2.0-85115048600https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/77887Objectives: Selectively reported results from only well-performing cutoffs in diagnostic accuracy studies may bias estimates in meta-analyses. We investigated cutoff reporting patterns for the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9; standard cutoff 10) and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS; no standard cutoff, commonly used 10–13) and compared accuracy estimates based on published cutoffs versus all cutoffs. Methods: We conducted bivariate random effects meta-analyses using individual participant data to compare accuracy from published versus all cutoffs. Results: For the PHQ-9 (30 studies, N = 11,773), published results underestimated sensitivity for cutoffs below 10 (median difference: −0.06) and overestimated for cutoffs above 10 (median difference: 0.07). EPDS (19 studies, N = 3637) sensitivity estimates from published results were similar for cutoffs below 10 (median difference: 0.00) but higher for cutoffs above 13 (median difference: 0.14). Specificity estimates from published and all cutoffs were similar for both tools. The mean cutoff of all reported cutoffs in PHQ-9 studies with optimal cutoff below 10 was 8.8 compared to 11.8 for those with optimal cutoffs above 10. Mean for EPDS studies with optimal cutoffs below 10 was 9.9 compared to 11.8 for those with optimal cutoffs greater than 10. Conclusion: Selective cutoff reporting was more pronounced for the PHQ-9 than EPDS.Mahidol UniversityMedicineArticleSCOPUS10.1002/mpr.1873