Cargando…

Measurement properties of depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes: a systematic review

PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review on measurement properties of questionnaires measuring depressive symptoms in adult patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature in MEDLINE, EMbase and PsycINFO was performed. Full text, original articles, published in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Dijk, Susan E. M., Adriaanse, Marcel C., van der Zwaan, Lennart, Bosmans, Judith E., van Marwijk, Harm W. J., van Tulder, Maurits W., Terwee, Caroline B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5951879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29396653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1782-y
_version_ 1783323088311549952
author van Dijk, Susan E. M.
Adriaanse, Marcel C.
van der Zwaan, Lennart
Bosmans, Judith E.
van Marwijk, Harm W. J.
van Tulder, Maurits W.
Terwee, Caroline B.
author_facet van Dijk, Susan E. M.
Adriaanse, Marcel C.
van der Zwaan, Lennart
Bosmans, Judith E.
van Marwijk, Harm W. J.
van Tulder, Maurits W.
Terwee, Caroline B.
author_sort van Dijk, Susan E. M.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review on measurement properties of questionnaires measuring depressive symptoms in adult patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature in MEDLINE, EMbase and PsycINFO was performed. Full text, original articles, published in any language up to October 2016 were included. Eligibility for inclusion was independently assessed by three reviewers who worked in pairs. Methodological quality of the studies was evaluated by two independent reviewers using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Quality of the questionnaires was rated per measurement property, based on the number and quality of the included studies and the reported results. RESULTS: Of 6286 unique hits, 21 studies met our criteria evaluating nine different questionnaires in multiple settings and languages. The methodological quality of the included studies was variable for the different measurement properties: 9/15 studies scored ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ on internal consistency, 2/5 on reliability, 0/1 on content validity, 10/10 on structural validity, 8/11 on hypothesis testing, 1/5 on cross-cultural validity, and 4/9 on criterion validity. For the CES-D, there was strong evidence for good internal consistency, structural validity, and construct validity; moderate evidence for good criterion validity; and limited evidence for good cross-cultural validity. The PHQ-9 and WHO-5 also performed well on several measurement properties. However, the evidence for structural validity of the PHQ-9 was inconclusive. The WHO-5 was less extensively researched and originally not developed to measure depression. CONCLUSION: Currently, the CES-D is best supported for measuring depressive symptoms in diabetes patients. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11136-018-1782-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5951879
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59518792018-05-18 Measurement properties of depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes: a systematic review van Dijk, Susan E. M. Adriaanse, Marcel C. van der Zwaan, Lennart Bosmans, Judith E. van Marwijk, Harm W. J. van Tulder, Maurits W. Terwee, Caroline B. Qual Life Res Review PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review on measurement properties of questionnaires measuring depressive symptoms in adult patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature in MEDLINE, EMbase and PsycINFO was performed. Full text, original articles, published in any language up to October 2016 were included. Eligibility for inclusion was independently assessed by three reviewers who worked in pairs. Methodological quality of the studies was evaluated by two independent reviewers using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Quality of the questionnaires was rated per measurement property, based on the number and quality of the included studies and the reported results. RESULTS: Of 6286 unique hits, 21 studies met our criteria evaluating nine different questionnaires in multiple settings and languages. The methodological quality of the included studies was variable for the different measurement properties: 9/15 studies scored ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ on internal consistency, 2/5 on reliability, 0/1 on content validity, 10/10 on structural validity, 8/11 on hypothesis testing, 1/5 on cross-cultural validity, and 4/9 on criterion validity. For the CES-D, there was strong evidence for good internal consistency, structural validity, and construct validity; moderate evidence for good criterion validity; and limited evidence for good cross-cultural validity. The PHQ-9 and WHO-5 also performed well on several measurement properties. However, the evidence for structural validity of the PHQ-9 was inconclusive. The WHO-5 was less extensively researched and originally not developed to measure depression. CONCLUSION: Currently, the CES-D is best supported for measuring depressive symptoms in diabetes patients. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11136-018-1782-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2018-02-02 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5951879/ /pubmed/29396653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1782-y Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review
van Dijk, Susan E. M.
Adriaanse, Marcel C.
van der Zwaan, Lennart
Bosmans, Judith E.
van Marwijk, Harm W. J.
van Tulder, Maurits W.
Terwee, Caroline B.
Measurement properties of depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes: a systematic review
title Measurement properties of depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes: a systematic review
title_full Measurement properties of depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes: a systematic review
title_fullStr Measurement properties of depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Measurement properties of depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes: a systematic review
title_short Measurement properties of depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes: a systematic review
title_sort measurement properties of depression questionnaires in patients with diabetes: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5951879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29396653
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1782-y
work_keys_str_mv AT vandijksusanem measurementpropertiesofdepressionquestionnairesinpatientswithdiabetesasystematicreview
AT adriaansemarcelc measurementpropertiesofdepressionquestionnairesinpatientswithdiabetesasystematicreview
AT vanderzwaanlennart measurementpropertiesofdepressionquestionnairesinpatientswithdiabetesasystematicreview
AT bosmansjudithe measurementpropertiesofdepressionquestionnairesinpatientswithdiabetesasystematicreview
AT vanmarwijkharmwj measurementpropertiesofdepressionquestionnairesinpatientswithdiabetesasystematicreview
AT vantuldermauritsw measurementpropertiesofdepressionquestionnairesinpatientswithdiabetesasystematicreview
AT terweecarolineb measurementpropertiesofdepressionquestionnairesinpatientswithdiabetesasystematicreview