Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36899016›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2023

Individual participant data meta-analysis to compare EPDS accuracy to detect major depression with and without the self-harm item.

Xia Qiu, Yin Wu, Ying Sun, Brooke Levis, Jizhou Tian, Jill T Boruff, Pim Cuijpers, John P A Ioannidis, Sarah Markham, Roy C Ziegelstein and 4 more

Full text readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. How prenatal cortisol levels relate to grandmother-mother relationships among a cohort of Latina women.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2023
    Article
  10. 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

14 authors.

Xia QiuLady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, 4333 Cote Ste Catherine Road, Montréal, QC, H3T 1E4, Canada.
Yin WuLady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, 4333 Cote Ste Catherine Road, Montréal, QC, H3T 1E4, Canada.
Ying SunLady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, 4333 Cote Ste Catherine Road, Montréal, QC, H3T 1E4, Canada.
Brooke LevisLady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, 4333 Cote Ste Catherine Road, Montréal, QC, H3T 1E4, Canada.
Jizhou TianLady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, 4333 Cote Ste Catherine Road, Montréal, QC, H3T 1E4, Canada.
Jill T BoruffSchulich Library of Physical Sciences, Life Sciences, and Engineering, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
John P A IoannidisDepartment of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Department of Biomedical Data Science, Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Sarah MarkhamDepartment of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, King's College London, London, UK.
Roy C ZiegelsteinDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Simone N VigodWomen's College Hospital and Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Andrea BenedettiDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada. andrea.benedetti@mcgill.ca.
Brett D ThombsLady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, 4333 Cote Ste Catherine Road, Montréal, QC, H3T 1E4, Canada. brett.thombs@mcgill.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-5644-8432
DEPRESsion Screening Data (DEPRESSD) EPDS Group

Funding

Effects of Perinatal Depression on PTD and LBWR01HD045735 · NICHD · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI YONKERS, KIMBERLY A · 2004 to 2008
$4.6M
Department of Health RP-DG-1108-10012Department of Health RP-PG-1210-12002NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD045735Wellcome Trust 071571Wellcome Trust 082384/Z/07/ZWellcome Trust 211374/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Item 10 of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is intended to assess thoughts of intentional self-harm but may also elicit concerns about accidental self-harm. It does not specifically address suicide ideation but, nonetheless, is sometimes used as an indicator of suicidality. The 9-item version of the EPDS (EPDS-9), which omits item 10, is sometimes used in research due to concern about positive endorsements of item 10 and necessary follow-up. We assessed the equivalence of total score correlations and screening accuracy to detect major depression using the EPDS-9 versus full EPDS among pregnant and postpartum women. We searched Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from database inception to October 3, 2018 for studies that administered the EPDS and conducted diagnostic classification for major depression based on a validated semi-structured or fully structured interview among women aged 18 or older during pregnancy or within 12 months of giving birth. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis. We calculated Pearson correlations with 95% prediction interval (PI) between EPDS-9 and full EPDS total scores using a random effects model. Bivariate random-effects models were fitted to assess screening accuracy. Equivalence tests were done by comparing the confidence intervals (CIs) around the pooled sensitivity and specificity differences to the equivalence margin of δ = 0.05. Individual participant data were obtained from 41 eligible studies (10,906 participants, 1407 major depression cases). The correlation between EPDS-9 and full EPDS scores was 0.998 (95% PI 0.991, 0.999). For sensitivity, the EPDS-9 and full EPDS were equivalent for cut-offs 7-12 (difference range - 0.02, 0.01) and the equivalence was indeterminate for cut-offs 13-15 (all differences - 0.04). For specificity, the EPDS-9 and full EPDS were equivalent for all cut-offs (difference range 0.00, 0.01). The EPDS-9 performs similarly to the full EPDS and can be used when there are concerns about the implications of administering EPDS item 10.Trial registration: The original IPDMA was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015024785).

Indexed as

Depression, PostpartumMajor Depressive DisorderDepressionFemaleHumansPregnancyPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesSuicidal Ideation

Identifiers

PMID36899016
PMCPMC10006408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read92
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.