ArticlePsychotherapy and psychosomatics2021
Probability of Major Depression Classification Based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI Diagnostic Interviews: A Synthesis of Three Individual Participant Data Meta-Analyses.
Article in Psychotherapy and psychosomatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Depression prevalence of the Geriatric Depression Scale-15 was compared to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM using individual participant data meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- Results from a living systematic review of the prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders and factors associated with symptoms in systemic sclerosis.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Individual participant data meta-analysis to compare EPDS accuracy to detect major depression with and without the self-harm item.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- External validation of a shortened screening tool using individual participant data meta-analysis: A case study of the Patient Health Questionnaire-Dep-4.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2022Pooled it
- Accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for screening to detect major depression: updated systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Pooled it
- Selective cutoff reporting in studies of the accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale: Comparison of results based on published cutoffs versus all cutoffs using individual participant data meta-analysis.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2021Pooled it
- Accuracy of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Depression subscale (HADS-D) to screen for major depression: systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Mental Health Screening Tools After Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Evaluating gender differences in depression screening: diagnostic accuracy and measurement invariance of the DESY-PC questionnaire in primary care.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026Article
- Article
- Postpartum Depression Screening in Latvia: Validation and Optimal Cut-Off of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Depression prevalence estimates in Spain (1995-2021): a systematic review.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2026Review
- Evaluating the necessity of booster sessions in relapse prevention for depression: a longitudinal study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Data-Driven Cutoff Selection for the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Depression Screening Tool.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Mental Health of Royal Canadian Mounted Police at the Start of the Cadet Training Program.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2023Article
- Prevalence of mental disorders in refugees and asylum seekers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2022Article
- Mid-term Psychiatric Outcomes of Patients Recovered From COVID-19 From an Italian Cohort of Hospitalized Patients.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Association between Type-D Personality and Affective (Anxiety, Depression, Post-traumatic Stress) Symptoms and Maladaptive Coping in Breast Cancer Patients: A Longitudinal Study.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2021Article
- The Prevalence and Sociodemographic Correlates of Social Anxiety Disorder: A Focused National Survey.Chronic stress (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThree previous individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) reported that, compared to the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM (SCID), alternative reference standards, primarily the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), tended to misclassify major depression status, when controlling for depression symptom severity. However, there was an important lack of precision in the results.
objectiveTo compare the odds of the major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI.
methodsWe included and standardized data from 3 IPDMA databases. For each IPDMA, separately, we fitted binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of major depression classification, controlling for symptom severity and characteristics of participants, and the interaction between interview and symptom severity. Next, we synthesized results using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis.
resultsIn total, 69,405 participants (7,574 [11%] with major depression) from 212 studies were included. Controlling for symptom severity and participant characteristics, the MINI (74 studies; 25,749 participants) classified major depression more often than the SCID (108 studies; 21,953 participants; aOR 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.92]). Classification odds for the CIDI (30 studies; 21,703 participants) and the SCID did not differ overall (aOR 1.19; 95% CI 0.79-1.75); however, as screening scores increased, the aOR increased less for the CIDI than the SCID (interaction aOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.80).
conclusionsCompared to the SCID, the MINI classified major depression more often. The odds of the depression classification with the CIDI increased less as symptom levels increased. Interpretation of research that uses diagnostic interviews to classify depression should consider the interview characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.