ArticleBMC psychiatry2021
Validation of case definitions of depression derived from administrative data against the CIDI-SF as reference standard: results from the PROspective Québec (PROQ) study.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Beyond the Individual: The Weight of Social and Structural Determinants of Depression Among Transgender Women Living with HIV in France (ANRS-Trans&HIV).AIDS and behavior · 2026Observational
- Incidence of new-onset depression after colorectal cancer diagnosis and associated mortality: a population-based cohort study.BMJ oncology · 2026Article
- Mental Comorbidity and Psychosocial Care in Patients with Cancer.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025Article
- Examining the association between toilet access and major depression among older adults in India: a cross-sectional analysis of the Longitudinal Aging Study in India from 2017 to 2018.Age and ageing · 2025Article
- Trends in Depression Among Hospitalized Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Spain (2017-2023): A Population-Based Analysis with a Focus on Sex Differences and In-Hospital Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Mental healthcare utilisation among individuals with colorectal cancer: population-based cohort studies.BMJ oncology · 2025Article
- Gender differences in life expectancy free of depressive symptoms in Chile between 2003 and 2016.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2024Article
- Association between first-line antidepressant use and risk of dementia in older adults: a retrospective cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2023Article
- The genetic basis of major depressive disorder.Molecular psychiatry · 2023Review
- Exploring Loneliness, Fear and Depression among Older Adults during the COVID-19 Era: A Cross-Sectional Study in Greek Provincial Towns.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdministrative data have several advantages over questionnaire and interview data to identify cases of depression: they are usually inexpensive, available for a long period of time and are less subject to recall bias and differential classification errors. However, the validity of administrative data in the correct identification of depression has not yet been studied in general populations. The present study aimed to 1) evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of administrative cases of depression using the validated Composite International Diagnostic Interview - Short Form (CIDI-SF) as reference standard and 2) compare the known-groups validity between administrative and CIDI-SF cases of depression.
methodsThe 5487 participants seen at the last wave (2015-2018) of the PROQ cohort had CIDI-SF questionnaire data linked to hospitalization and medical reimbursement data provided by the provincial universal healthcare provider and coded using the International Classification of Disease. We analyzed the sensitivity and specificity of several case definitions of depression from this administrative data. Their association with known predictors of depression was estimated using robust Poisson regression models.
resultsAdministrative cases of depression showed high specificity (≥ 96%), low sensitivity (19-32%), and rather low agreement (Cohen's kappa of 0.21-0.25) compared with the CIDI-SF. These results were consistent over strata of sex, age and education level and with varying case definitions. In known-groups analysis, the administrative cases of depression were comparable to that of CIDI-SF cases (RR for sex: 1.80 vs 2.03 respectively, age: 1.53 vs 1.40, education: 1.52 vs 1.28, psychological distress: 2.21 vs 2.65).
conclusionThe results obtained in this large sample of a general population suggest that the dimensions of depression captured by administrative data and by the CIDI-SF are partially distinct. However, their known-groups validity in relation to risk factors for depression was similar to that of CIDI-SF cases. We suggest that neither of these data sources is superior to the other in the context of large epidemiological studies aiming to identify and quantify risk factors for depression.
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.