Assessing validity of a depression screening instrument in the absence of a gold standard

Abstract

PurposeWe evaluated the extent to which use of a hypothesized imperfect gold standard, the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), biases the estimates of diagnostic accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). We also evaluate how statistical correction can be used to address this bias. MethodsThe study was conducted among 926 adults where structured interviews were conducted to collect information about participants' current major depressive disorder using PHQ-9 and CIDI instruments. First, we evaluated the relative psychometric properties of PHQ-9 using CIDI as a gold standard. Next, we used a Bayesian latent class model to correct for the bias. ResultsIn comparison with CIDI, the relative sensitivity and specificity of the PHQ-9 for detecting major depressive disorder at a cut point of 10 or more were 53.1% (95% confidence interval: 45.4%–60.8%) and 77.5% (95% confidence interval, 74.5%–80.5%), respectively. Using a Bayesian latent class model to correct for the bias arising from the use of an imperfect gold standard increased the sensitivity and specificity of PHQ-9 to 79.8% (95% Bayesian credible interval, 64.9%–90.8%) and 79.1% (95% Bayesian credible interval, 74.7%–83.7%), respectively. ConclusionsOur results provided evidence that assessing diagnostic validity of mental health screening instrument, where application of a gold standard might not be available, can be accomplished by using appropriate statistical methods.