Depression prevalence based on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale compared to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM DIsorders classification: Systematic review and individual participant data meta‐analysis

• Published in: International journal of methods in psychiatric research Vol. 30; no. 1; pp. e1860 - n/a
• Main Authors: Lyubenova, Anita, Neupane, Dipika, Levis, Brooke, Wu, Yin, Sun, Ying, He, Chen, Krishnan, Ankur, Bhandari, Parash M., Negeri, Zelalem, Imran, Mahrukh, Rice, Danielle B., Azar, Marleine, Chiovitti, Matthew J., Saadat, Nazanin, Riehm, Kira E., Boruff, Jill T., Ioannidis, John P. A., Cuijpers, Pim, Gilbody, Simon, Kloda, Lorie A., Patten, Scott B., Shrier, Ian, Ziegelstein, Roy C., Comeau, Liane, Mitchell, Nicholas D., Tonelli, Marcello, Vigod, Simone N., Aceti, Franca, Barnes, Jacqueline, Bavle, Amar D., Beck, Cheryl T., Bindt, Carola, Boyce, Philip M., Bunevicius, Adomas, Chaudron, Linda H., Favez, Nicolas, Figueiredo, Barbara, Garcia‐Esteve, Lluïsa, Giardinelli, Lisa, Helle, Nadine, Howard, Louise M., Kohlhoff, Jane, Kusminskas, Laima, Kozinszky, Zoltán, Lelli, Lorenzo, Leonardou, Angeliki A., Meuti, Valentina, Radoš, Sandra N., García, Purificación N., Pawlby, Susan J., Quispel, Chantal, Robertson‐Blackmore, Emma, Rochat, Tamsen J., Sharp, Deborah J., Siu, Bonnie W. M., Stein, Alan, Stewart, Robert C., Tadinac, Meri, Tandon, S. Darius, Tendais, Iva, Töreki, Annamária, Torres‐Giménez, Anna, Tran, Thach D., Trevillion, Kylee, Turner, Katherine, Vega‐Dienstmaier, Johann M., Benedetti, Andrea, Thombs, Brett D.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.03.2021; John Wiley and Sons Inc
• Subjects: Depression; depression prevalence; Depression, Postpartum; Depressive Disorder, Major - diagnosis; Depressive Disorder, Major - epidemiology; Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale; Female; Humans; individual participant data meta‐analysis; major depression; Medicin och hälsovetenskap; Mental depression; Meta-analysis; Original; Postpartum; Postpartum depression; Pregnancy; Prevalence; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales; structured clinical interview for DSM; Systematic review; depression prevalence; individual participant data meta-analysis; Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale; structured clinical interview for DSM; major depression
• ISSN: 1049-8931; 1557-0657; 1557-0657
• DOI: 10.1002/mpr.1860

Objectives Estimates of depression prevalence in pregnancy and postpartum are based on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) more than on any other method. We aimed to determine if any EPDS cutoff can accurately and consistently estimate depression prevalence in individual studies. Methods We analyzed datasets that compared EPDS scores to Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) major depression status. Random‐effects meta‐analysis was used to compare prevalence with EPDS cutoffs versus the SCID. Results Seven thousand three hundred and fifteen participants (1017 SCID major depression) from 29 primary studies were included. For EPDS cutoffs used to estimate prevalence in recent studies (≥9 to ≥14), pooled prevalence estimates ranged from 27.8% (95% CI: 22.0%–34.5%) for EPDS ≥ 9 to 9.0% (95% CI: 6.8%–11.9%) for EPDS ≥ 14; pooled SCID major depression prevalence was 9.0% (95% CI: 6.5%–12.3%). EPDS ≥14 provided pooled prevalence closest to SCID‐based prevalence but differed from SCID prevalence in individual studies by a mean absolute difference of 5.1% (95% prediction interval: −13.7%, 12.3%). Conclusion EPDS ≥14 approximated SCID‐based prevalence overall, but considerable heterogeneity in individual studies is a barrier to using it for prevalence estimation.