Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32523369›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2020

Correspondence Between the Neuropsychiatric Interview M.I.N.I. and the BDI-II and MADRS-S Self-Rating Instruments as Diagnostic Tools in Primary Care Patients with Depression.

Shabnam Nejati, Nashmil Ariai, Cecilia Björkelund, Ingmarie Skoglund, Eva-Lisa Petersson, Pia Augustsson, Dominique Hange, Irene Svenningsson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of general medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Shabnam NejatiPrimary Health Care/School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Nashmil AriaiPrimary Health Care/School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Cecilia BjörkelundPrimary Health Care/School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Ingmarie SkoglundPrimary Health Care/School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Eva-Lisa PeterssonPrimary Health Care/School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Pia AugustssonNarhalsan Research and Development Primary Health Care, Region Vastra Gotaland, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-4698-4151
Dominique HangePrimary Health Care/School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Irene SvenningssonPrimary Health Care/School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-7421-8171

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the correspondence between the diagnoses received by patients with symptoms of common mental disorder attending primary care, based on the diagnostic instrument International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.) and the self-assessment instruments such as Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale - self-rating version (MADRS-S), respectively.

designData were collected from a prospective observational study, ADAS, between 2014 and 2015.

settingTwenty-eight primary care centers in Region Västra Gotaland, Sweden. PATIENTS: A total of 192 patients, 18-60 years of age, on sick leave ≥14 days, with mild/moderate depression, anxiety syndrome, and stress-related mental illness were included.

main outcome measuresScores of the assessment instruments (BDI-II and MADRS-S) on inclusion, sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for BDI-II and MADRS-S, respectively, with M.I.N.I used as diagnostic instrument.

resultsUsing M.I.N.I. as gold standard, the BDI-II and MADRS-S showed almost the same sensitivity (86.9% and 87.4%, respectively), but specificity for MADRS-S was doubled compared to BDI-II (36% and 18%, respectively). There was a significant association between MADRS-S and M.I.N.I. (p=0.027). However, the same analysis between BDI and M.I.N.I. was not statistically significant (p= 0.635). NPV and PPV were calculated from assumed prevalences (10% and 75%) and were higher for MADRS-S compared to BDI-II. The PPV differences were between 2% and 7% and NPV differences were between 3% and 19%.

conclusionWith M.I.N.I. as gold standard, MADRS-S performs better than BDI-II as a self-assessment tool in the primary care context for depression diagnostics.

Indexed as

depressiondiagnostic instrumentprimary careself-assessment instrument

Identifiers

PMID32523369
PMCPMC7234955

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.