Accuracy of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for screening to detect major depression: individual participant data meta-analysis
Brooke Levis,Andrea Benedetti,Brett D Thombs,Kira E Riehm,Nazanin Saadat,Alexander W Levis,Marleine Azar,Danielle B Rice,Matthew J Chiovitti,Tatiana A Sanchez,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,Charles H Bombardier,Peter Butterworth,Gregory Carter,Marcos H Chagas,Juliana C N Chan,Kerrie Clover,Yeates Conwell,Janneke M de Man-van Ginkel,Jaime Delgadillo,Jesse R Fann,Felix H Fischer,Daniel Fung,Bizu Gelaye,Felicity Goodyear-Smith,Catherine G Greeno,Brian J Hall,John Hambridge,Patricia A Harrison,Martin Härter,Ulrich Hegerl,Leanne Hides,Stevan E Hobfoll,Marie Hudson,Masatoshi Inagaki,Khalida Ismail,Nathalie Jetté,Mohammad E Khamseh,Kim M Kiely,Yunxin Kwan,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 Santos,Juwita Shaaban,Abbey Sidebottom,Adam Simning,Lesley Stafford,Sharon C Sung,Pei Lin Lynnette Tan,Alyna Turner,Christina M van der Feltz-Cornelis,Henk C van Weert,Paul A Vöhringer,Jennifer White,Mary A Whooley,Kirsty Winkley,Mitsuhiko Yamada,Yuying Zhang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1476
2019-04-09
BMJ
Abstract:Abstract Objective To determine the accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for screening to detect major depression. Design Individual participant data meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (January 2000-February 2015). Inclusion criteria Eligible studies compared PHQ-9 scores with major depression diagnoses from validated diagnostic interviews. Primary study data and study level data extracted from primary reports were synthesized. For PHQ-9 cut-off scores 5-15, bivariate random effects meta-analysis was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity, separately, among studies that used semistructured diagnostic interviews, which are designed for administration by clinicians; fully structured interviews, which are designed for lay administration; and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric (MINI) diagnostic interviews, a brief fully structured interview. Sensitivity and specificity were examined among participant subgroups and, separately, using meta-regression, considering all subgroup variables in a single model. Results Data were obtained for 58 of 72 eligible studies (total n=17 357; major depression cases n=2312). Combined sensitivity and specificity was maximized at a cut-off score of 10 or above among studies using a semistructured interview (29 studies, 6725 participants; sensitivity 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 0.92; specificity 0.85, 0.82 to 0.88). Across cut-off scores 5-15, sensitivity with semistructured interviews was 5-22% higher than for fully structured interviews (MINI excluded; 14 studies, 7680 participants) and 2-15% higher than for the MINI (15 studies, 2952 participants). Specificity was similar across diagnostic interviews. The PHQ-9 seems to be similarly sensitive but may be less specific for younger patients than for older patients; a cut-off score of 10 or above can be used regardless of age.. Conclusions PHQ-9 sensitivity compared with semistructured diagnostic interviews was greater than in previous conventional meta-analyses that combined reference standards. A cut-off score of 10 or above maximized combined sensitivity and specificity overall and for subgroups. Registration PROSPERO CRD42014010673.