Comparison of Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression - Depression subscale scores by administration mode: An individual participant data differential item functioning meta-analysis.

Harel, D; Wu, Y; Levis, B; Fan, S; Sun, Y; Xu, M; Rice, DB; Boruff, J; Markham, S; Ioannidis, JPA; Takwoingi, Y; Patten, SB; Ziegelstein, RC; Cuijpers, P; Gilbody, S; Vigod, S; Akena, D; Benedetti, A; Thombs, BD; DEPRESsion Screening Data (DEPRESSD) Collaboration,

Comparison of Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression - Depression subscale scores by administration mode: An individual participant data differential item functioning meta-analysis.

Harel, D Wu, Y Levis, B Fan, S Sun, Y Xu, M Rice, DB Boruff, J Markham, S Ioannidis, JPA Takwoingi, Y Patten, SB Ziegelstein, RC Cuijpers, P Gilbody, S Vigod, S Akena, D Benedetti, A Thombs, BD DEPRESsion Screening Data (DEPRESSD) Collaboration,

Permalink

Publisher:: Elsevier
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: J Affect Disord, 2024, 361, pp. 674-683
Issue Date:: 2024-09-15

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	1-s2.0-S0165032724009650-main.pdf	Published version	498.02 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Harel, D
dc.contributor.author	Wu, Y
dc.contributor.author	Levis, B
dc.contributor.author	Fan, S
dc.contributor.author	Sun, Y
dc.contributor.author	Xu, M
dc.contributor.author	Rice, DB
dc.contributor.author	Boruff, J
dc.contributor.author	Markham, S
dc.contributor.author	Ioannidis, JPA
dc.contributor.author	Takwoingi, Y
dc.contributor.author	Patten, SB
dc.contributor.author	Ziegelstein, RC
dc.contributor.author	Cuijpers, P
dc.contributor.author	Gilbody, S
dc.contributor.author	Vigod, S
dc.contributor.author	Akena, D
dc.contributor.author	Benedetti, A
dc.contributor.author	Thombs, BD
dc.contributor.author	DEPRESsion Screening Data (DEPRESSD) Collaboration,
dc.date.accessioned	2024-10-03T06:51:17Z
dc.date.available	2024-06-13
dc.date.available	2024-10-03T06:51:17Z
dc.date.issued	2024-09-15
dc.identifier.citation	J Affect Disord, 2024, 361, pp. 674-683
dc.identifier.issn	0165-0327
dc.identifier.issn	1573-2517
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/181169
dc.description.abstract	Administration mode of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may influence responses. We assessed if Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Depression subscale (HADS-D) item responses and scores were associated with administration mode. We compared (1) self-administration versus interview-administration; within self-administration (2) research or medical setting versus private; and (3) pen-and-paper versus electronic; and within interview-administration (4) in-person versus phone. We analysed individual participant data meta-analysis datasets with item-level data for the PHQ-9 (N = 34,529), EPDS (N = 16,813), and HADS-D (N = 16,768). We used multiple indicator multiple cause models to assess differential item functioning (DIF) by administration mode. We found statistically significant DIF for most items on all measures due to large samples, but influence on total scores was negligible. In 10 comparisons conducted across the PHQ-9, EPDS, and HADS-D, Pearson's correlations and intraclass correlation coefficients between latent depression symptom scores from models that did or did not account for DIF were between 0.995 and 1.000. Total PHQ-9, EPDS, and HADS-D scores did not differ materially across administration modes. Researcher and clinicians who evaluate depression symptoms with these questionnaires can select administration methods based on patient preferences, feasibility, or cost.
dc.format	Print-Electronic
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	Elsevier
dc.relation.ispartof	J Affect Disord
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1016/j.jad.2024.06.033
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subject	11 Medical and Health Sciences, 17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
dc.subject.classification	Psychiatry
dc.subject.classification	32 Biomedical and clinical sciences
dc.subject.classification	42 Health sciences
dc.subject.classification	52 Psychology
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Patient Health Questionnaire
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
dc.subject.mesh	Patient Reported Outcome Measures
dc.subject.mesh	Psychometrics
dc.subject.mesh	Depression
dc.subject.mesh	Adult
dc.subject.mesh	Depression, Postpartum
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Depression, Postpartum
dc.subject.mesh	Depression
dc.subject.mesh	Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
dc.subject.mesh	Psychometrics
dc.subject.mesh	Adult
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.subject.mesh	Patient Reported Outcome Measures
dc.subject.mesh	Patient Health Questionnaire
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Patient Health Questionnaire
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
dc.subject.mesh	Patient Reported Outcome Measures
dc.subject.mesh	Psychometrics
dc.subject.mesh	Depression
dc.subject.mesh	Adult
dc.subject.mesh	Depression, Postpartum
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.title	Comparison of Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression - Depression subscale scores by administration mode: An individual participant data differential item functioning meta-analysis.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	361
utslib.location.activity	Netherlands
utslib.for	11 Medical and Health Sciences
utslib.for	17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/School of Nursing and Midwifery
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
dc.date.updated	2024-10-03T06:51:14Z
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	361

Abstract:

Administration mode of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may influence responses. We assessed if Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Depression subscale (HADS-D) item responses and scores were associated with administration mode. We compared (1) self-administration versus interview-administration; within self-administration (2) research or medical setting versus private; and (3) pen-and-paper versus electronic; and within interview-administration (4) in-person versus phone. We analysed individual participant data meta-analysis datasets with item-level data for the PHQ-9 (N = 34,529), EPDS (N = 16,813), and HADS-D (N = 16,768). We used multiple indicator multiple cause models to assess differential item functioning (DIF) by administration mode. We found statistically significant DIF for most items on all measures due to large samples, but influence on total scores was negligible. In 10 comparisons conducted across the PHQ-9, EPDS, and HADS-D, Pearson's correlations and intraclass correlation coefficients between latent depression symptom scores from models that did or did not account for DIF were between 0.995 and 1.000. Total PHQ-9, EPDS, and HADS-D scores did not differ materially across administration modes. Researcher and clinicians who evaluate depression symptoms with these questionnaires can select administration methods based on patient preferences, feasibility, or cost.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/181169