Cargando…

The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care

BACKGROUND: The Major Depression Inventory (MDI) is widely used in Danish general practice as a screening tool to assess depression in symptomatic patients. Nevertheless, no validation studies of the MDI have been performed. The aim of this study was to validate the web-based version of the MDI agai...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nielsen, Marie Germund, Ørnbøl, Eva, Bech, Per, Vestergaard, Mogens, Christensen, Kaj Sparle
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5505538/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28740432
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S132913
_version_ 1783249449303146496
author Nielsen, Marie Germund
Ørnbøl, Eva
Bech, Per
Vestergaard, Mogens
Christensen, Kaj Sparle
author_facet Nielsen, Marie Germund
Ørnbøl, Eva
Bech, Per
Vestergaard, Mogens
Christensen, Kaj Sparle
author_sort Nielsen, Marie Germund
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Major Depression Inventory (MDI) is widely used in Danish general practice as a screening tool to assess depression in symptomatic patients. Nevertheless, no validation studies of the MDI have been performed. The aim of this study was to validate the web-based version of the MDI against a fully structured telephone interview in a population selected on clinical suspicion of depression (ie, presence of two or three core symptoms of depression) in general practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: General practitioners (GPs) invited consecutive persons suspected of depression to complete the web-based MDI in a primary care setting. The validation was based on the Munich-Composite International Diagnostic Interview (M-CIDI) by phone. GPs in the 22 practices in our study included 132 persons suspected of depression. Depression was rated as yes/no according to the MDI and M-CIDI. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) algorithms of the MDI were examined. RESULTS: According to the M-CIDI interview, 87.9% of the included population was depressed and 64.4% was severely depressed. According to the MDI scale, 59.1% of the population was depressed and 31.8% was severely depressed. The sensitivity of the MDI for depression was 62.1% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 52.6–70.9) and the specificity was 62.5% (95% CI: 35.4–84.8). The sensitivity for severe depression was 42.2% (95% CI: 30.6–52.4) and the specificity was 85.1% (95% CI: 71.7–93.8). The receiver operating curve showed an area under the curve of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.52–0.81) for any depression and of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.63–0.81) for severe depression. CONCLUSION: The MDI is a conservative instrument for diagnosing ICD-10 depression in a clinical setting compared to the M-CIDI interview. Only a few false-positive diagnoses were identified when the MDI was used on clinical suspicion of depression.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5505538
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55055382017-07-24 The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care Nielsen, Marie Germund Ørnbøl, Eva Bech, Per Vestergaard, Mogens Christensen, Kaj Sparle Clin Epidemiol Original Research BACKGROUND: The Major Depression Inventory (MDI) is widely used in Danish general practice as a screening tool to assess depression in symptomatic patients. Nevertheless, no validation studies of the MDI have been performed. The aim of this study was to validate the web-based version of the MDI against a fully structured telephone interview in a population selected on clinical suspicion of depression (ie, presence of two or three core symptoms of depression) in general practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: General practitioners (GPs) invited consecutive persons suspected of depression to complete the web-based MDI in a primary care setting. The validation was based on the Munich-Composite International Diagnostic Interview (M-CIDI) by phone. GPs in the 22 practices in our study included 132 persons suspected of depression. Depression was rated as yes/no according to the MDI and M-CIDI. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) algorithms of the MDI were examined. RESULTS: According to the M-CIDI interview, 87.9% of the included population was depressed and 64.4% was severely depressed. According to the MDI scale, 59.1% of the population was depressed and 31.8% was severely depressed. The sensitivity of the MDI for depression was 62.1% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 52.6–70.9) and the specificity was 62.5% (95% CI: 35.4–84.8). The sensitivity for severe depression was 42.2% (95% CI: 30.6–52.4) and the specificity was 85.1% (95% CI: 71.7–93.8). The receiver operating curve showed an area under the curve of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.52–0.81) for any depression and of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.63–0.81) for severe depression. CONCLUSION: The MDI is a conservative instrument for diagnosing ICD-10 depression in a clinical setting compared to the M-CIDI interview. Only a few false-positive diagnoses were identified when the MDI was used on clinical suspicion of depression. Dove Medical Press 2017-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5505538/ /pubmed/28740432 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S132913 Text en © 2017 Nielsen et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Nielsen, Marie Germund
Ørnbøl, Eva
Bech, Per
Vestergaard, Mogens
Christensen, Kaj Sparle
The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care
title The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care
title_full The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care
title_fullStr The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care
title_full_unstemmed The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care
title_short The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care
title_sort criterion validity of the web-based major depression inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5505538/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28740432
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S132913
work_keys_str_mv AT nielsenmariegermund thecriterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare
AT ørnbøleva thecriterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare
AT bechper thecriterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare
AT vestergaardmogens thecriterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare
AT christensenkajsparle thecriterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare
AT nielsenmariegermund criterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare
AT ørnbøleva criterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare
AT bechper criterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare
AT vestergaardmogens criterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare
AT christensenkajsparle criterionvalidityofthewebbasedmajordepressioninventorywhenusedonclinicalsuspicionofdepressioninprimarycare