Test For Major Depressive Disorder Research Articles

Validity of the patient health questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) for the detection of depression in primary care in Colombia

BackgroundThe PHQ-2 is a screening test for major depressive disorder (MDD) derived from PHQ-9, which has shown to be useful in the detection of cases of clinical significance in previous studies. The psychometric properties of PHQ-2 in the Colombian population are unknown. MethodsPHQ-2 were assessed in 243 patients in general medical consultations using the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) as the gold standard. Internal consistency, convergent validity and criterion validity were calculated by analyzing the Receptor Operating Characteristics (ROC) and the area under the curve (AUC). ResultsCronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients were 0.71. Spearman's rho coefficients for correlations with PHQ-9 and HADS-D scores were 0.63 and 0.59 (p<0.01). AUC was 0.89. The optimal cut point was ≥2 with the following indicators: sensitivity 0.87 specificity 0.74; Youden index 0.60; PPV 0.47; NPV 0.95; (LR+) 3.24; (LR-) 0.18 (95% CI 0.09-0.37). Kappa coefficient between PHQ-2 and MINI for depression was .458 and 0.46 for HADS-D. LimitationsSince this study was done with people attending hospital, which could has implications for the prevalence of depression, affecting the validity indicators of the instrument. ConclusionsPHQ-2 show an acceptable test performance in the context of the study. However, the test could yield a considerable amount of false positives that would require specialized evaluation to establish a reliable diagnosis.

Comparison of the Usefulness of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 for Screening for Major Depressive Disorder: Analysis of Psychiatric Outpatient Data.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to demonstrate that the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-8 is not less useful than the PHQ-9 as a screening test for major depressive disorder (MDD). MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of 567 patients in psychiatric outpatient units. The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview was used to diagnose MDD. We derived the validity and reliability of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9. To evaluate the ability of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 to discriminate MDD, we drew receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and compared the areas under the curves (AUCs). ResultsOf the 567 participants, 207 (36.5%) were diagnosed with MDD. Cronbach’s αs for the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 were 0.892 and 0.876, respectively. Similar to the PHQ-9, the PHQ-8 was also associated with scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale in a correlation analysis. When we drew ROC curves for the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9, there was no statistically significant difference in the AUCs. With a cutoff score of 10, the PHQ-8 showed a sensitivity of 58.3%, specificity of 83.1%, positive predictive value of 53.4%, and negative predictive value of 85.7%. ConclusionIn a psychiatric outpatient sample, the PHQ-8 was as useful as the PHQ-9 for MDD screening.

Gene expression-based biological test for major depressive disorder: an advanced study

PurposeRecently, we could distinguished patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) from nonpsychiatric controls with high accuracy using a panel of five gene expression markers (ARHGAP24, HDAC5, PDGFC, PRNP, and SLC6A4) in leukocyte. In the present study, we examined whether this biological test is able to discriminate patients with MDD from those without MDD, including those with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.Patients and methodsWe measured messenger ribonucleic acid expression levels of the aforementioned five genes in peripheral leukocytes in 17 patients with schizophrenia and 36 patients with bipolar disorder using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and we combined these expression data with our previous expression data of 25 patients with MDD and 25 controls. Subsequently, a linear discriminant function was developed for use in discriminating between patients with MDD and without MDD.ResultsThis expression panel was able to segregate patients with MDD from those without MDD with a sensitivity and specificity of 64% and 67.9%, respectively.ConclusionFurther research to identify MDD-specific markers is needed to improve the performance of this biological test.

CAD-MDD

Article AbstractBecause this piece does not have an abstract, we have provided for your benefit the first 3 sentences of the full text.To the Editor: In the recent article by Gibbons and colleagues, their Computerized Adaptive Diagnostic Test for Major Depressive Disorder (CAD-MDD) was presented as a "diagnostic screening tool." However, the authors themselves stated, "Screening measures, like the CAD-MDD, are not diagnostic measures…." Consistency is needed. The term diagnostic screening tool is self-contradictory, and calling this test "diagnostic" is misleading. Screening tests do not make diagnoses—they assess the likelihood of undeclared disease.

The Computerized Adaptive Diagnostic Test for Major Depressive Disorder (CAD-MDD)

To develop a computerized adaptive diagnostic screening tool for depression that decreases patient and clinician burden and increases sensitivity and specificity for clinician-based DSM-IV diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD). 656 individuals with and without minor and major depression were recruited from a psychiatric clinic and a community mental health center and through public announcements (controls without depression). The focus of the study was the development of the Computerized Adaptive Diagnostic Test for Major Depressive Disorder (CAD-MDD) diagnostic screening tool based on a decision-theoretical approach (random forests and decision trees). The item bank consisted of 88 depression scale items drawn from 73 depression measures. Sensitivity and specificity for predicting clinician-based Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders diagnoses of MDD were the primary outcomes. Diagnostic screening accuracy was then compared to that of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). An average of 4 items per participant was required (maximum of 6 items). Overall sensitivity and specificity were 0.95 and 0.87, respectively. For the PHQ-9, sensitivity was 0.70 and specificity was 0.91. High sensitivity and reasonable specificity for a clinician-based DSM-IV diagnosis of depression can be obtained using an average of 4 adaptively administered self-report items in less than 1 minute. Relative to the currently used PHQ-9, the CAD-MDD dramatically increased sensitivity while maintaining similar specificity. As such, the CAD-MDD will identify more true positives (lower false-negative rate) than the PHQ-9 using half the number of items. Inexpensive (relative to clinical assessment), efficient, and accurate screening of depression in the settings of primary care, psychiatric epidemiology, molecular genetics, and global health are all direct applications of the current system.

The DEX/CRH test for major depression: A potentially useful diagnostic test

The dexamethasone/corticotropin-releasing hormone (DEX/CRH) test has been proposed as a potential diagnostic test for major depressive disorder (MDD). A previously proposed four-step approach assesses the stage of development for a biological finding into a clinically useful diagnostic test. Using this approach, we evaluated the progress of the DEX/CRH test using meta-analysis as a part of step 1. A literature review identified 15 studies of the DEX/CRH test in patients with MDD and healthy controls. Meta-analysis estimated the effect size, heterogeneity, and confidence intervals using random effects models. Studies consistent with any step of the four-step approach were identified, and their characteristics were presented. Eleven studies reported significantly higher cortisol levels with the DEX/CRH test in patients with MDD, compared with the healthy controls (step 1). Eight eligible studies were included in meta-analysis, and had an effect size of 1.34 (95% confidence interval: 0.70–1.97). Most studies were step-1 studies (comparison of patients and healthy controls), and no step-4 studies (multicenter trials) were found. This review emphasizes that despite appearing as a promising test, the DEX/CRH has not been adequately studied for the required stages of development into a clinically useful laboratory test. Particularly, additional step-3 and step-4 studies are necessary.

Assessment of a multi-assay, serum-based biological diagnostic test for major depressive disorder: a Pilot and Replication Study

Despite decades of intensive research, the development of a diagnostic test for major depressive disorder (MDD) had proven to be a formidable and elusive task, with all individual marker-based approaches yielding insufficient sensitivity and specificity for clinical use. In the present work, we examined the diagnostic performance of a multi-assay, serum-based test in two independent samples of patients with MDD. Serum levels of nine biomarkers (alpha1 antitrypsin, apolipoprotein CIII, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, cortisol, epidermal growth factor, myeloperoxidase, prolactin, resistin and soluble tumor necrosis factor alpha receptor type II) in peripheral blood were measured in two samples of MDD patients, and one of the non-depressed control subjects. Biomarkers measured were agreed upon a priori, and were selected on the basis of previous exploratory analyses in separate patient/control samples. Individual assay values were combined mathematically to yield an MDDScore. A 'positive' test, (consistent with the presence of MDD) was defined as an MDDScore of 50 or greater. For the Pilot Study, 36 MDD patients were recruited along with 43 non-depressed subjects. In this sample, the test demonstrated a sensitivity and specificity of 91.7% and 81.3%, respectively, in differentiating between the two groups. The Replication Study involved 34 MDD subjects, and yielded nearly identical sensitivity and specificity (91.1% and 81%, respectively). The results of the present study suggest that this test can differentiate MDD subjects from non-depressed controls with adequate sensitivity and specificity. Further research is needed to confirm the performance of the test across various age and ethnic groups, and in different clinical settings.