Optimal cut-off score for diagnosing depression with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9): a meta-analysis

病人健康调查表 医学 置信区间 荟萃分析 接收机工作特性 诊断优势比 优势比 重性抑郁障碍 萧条(经济学) 梅德林 诊断试验中的似然比 物理疗法 内科学 精神科 抑郁症状 心情 焦虑 法学 经济 宏观经济学 政治学
作者
Laura Manea,Simon Gilbody,Dean McMillan
出处
期刊:Canadian Medical Association Journal [Canadian Medical Association]
卷期号:184 (3): E191-E196 被引量:1364
标识
DOI:10.1503/cmaj.110829
摘要

Background:

The brief Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) is commonly used to screen for depression with 10 often recommended as the cut-off score. We summarized the psychometric properties of the PHQ-9 across a range of studies and cut-off scores to select the optimal cut-off for detecting depression.

Methods:

We searched Embase, MEDLINE and PsycINFO from 1999 to August 2010 for studies that reported the diagnostic accuracy of PHQ-9 to diagnose major depressive disorders. We calculated summary sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and diagnostic odds ratios for detecting major depressive disorder at different cut-off scores and in different settings. We used random-effects bivariate meta-analysis at cutoff points between 7 and 15 to produce summary receiver operating characteristic curves.

Results:

We identified 18 validation studies (n = 7180) conducted in various clinical settings. Eleven studies provided details about the diagnostic properties of the questionnaire at more than one cut-off score (including 10), four studies reported a cut-off score of 10, and three studies reported cut-off scores other than 10. The pooled specificity results ranged from 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63–0.82) for a cut-off score of 7 to 0.96 (95% CI 0.94–0.97) for a cut-off score of 15. There was major variability in sensitivity for cut-off scores between 7 and 15. There were no substantial differences in the pooled sensitivity and specificity for a range of cut-off scores (8–11).

Interpretation:

The PHQ-9 was found to have acceptable diagnostic properties for detecting major depressive disorder for cut-off scores between 8 and 11. Authors of future validation studies should consistently report the outcomes for different cut-off scores.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
刚刚
Kyone发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
江逾白发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
聪聪过矣发布了新的文献求助20
2秒前
胡子西瓜发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
4秒前
科研通AI6.2应助富裕采纳,获得10
4秒前
NexusExplorer应助群_科大采纳,获得10
5秒前
科研通AI6.2应助圈圈采纳,获得200
5秒前
6秒前
YAMABUKI完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
yihe完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
脑洞疼应助wdh采纳,获得10
8秒前
9秒前
9秒前
机灵的幻莲关注了科研通微信公众号
9秒前
Akim应助旦皋采纳,获得10
10秒前
科研通AI6.1应助车剑锋采纳,获得10
10秒前
Hwen发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
冰枫发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
10秒前
11秒前
ding应助sward915采纳,获得10
12秒前
聪聪过矣完成签到,获得积分20
14秒前
江逾白完成签到,获得积分10
14秒前
luluw发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
科研通AI6.1应助计可盈采纳,获得10
14秒前
14秒前
七田皿发布了新的文献求助20
14秒前
15秒前
16秒前
16秒前
16秒前
巫马尔槐发布了新的文献求助30
17秒前
胡子西瓜完成签到,获得积分10
17秒前
CodeCraft应助栗子采纳,获得10
17秒前
祖曼易完成签到,获得积分0
17秒前
17秒前
嘉嘉嘉嘉嘉完成签到,获得积分10
17秒前
Anna完成签到,获得积分10
18秒前
高分求助中
Clinical Epidemiology: The Essentials, 6e 10000
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
The Graphene Handbook (2019 Edition) 800
Adhesion Science: Principles & Practice 800
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
Fundamentals of Pharmaceutical and Biologics Regulations: A Global Perspective, Second Edition 600
久松真一著作集〈第5巻〉禅と芸術 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 物理 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 细胞生物学 基因 无机化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6544499
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8333902
关于积分的说明 17858762
捐赠科研通 5653067
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2937270
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1913584
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1776345