P Nabbe1, J Y Le Reste2, M Guillou-Landreat3, M A Munoz Perez4, S Argyriadou5, A Claveria6, M I Fernández San Martín4, S Czachowski7, H Lingner8, C Lygidakis9, A Sowinska10, B Chiron11, J Derriennic11, A Le Prielec11, B Le Floch11, T Montier12, H Van Marwijk13, P Van Royen14. 1. Department of general practice, université de Bretagne Occidentale, ERCR SPURBO, Brest, France. Electronic address: patrice.nabbe@univ-brest.fr. 2. Department of general practice, université de Bretagne Occidentale, ERCR SPURBO, Brest, France. Electronic address: lereste@univ.brest.fr. 3. Department of addictology, université de Bretagne Occidentale, ERCR SPURBO, Brest, France. 4. IDIAP jordi GOL unitat de support a la recerca, Barcelona, Spain. 5. The Greek Association of General Practitioners (ELEGEIA), Thessaloniki, Greece. 6. Galician National Health Service, Universidad de Vigo, Rúa Oporta, 1, 36201 Vigo, Spain. 7. Department of Family Doctor, University Nicolaus Copernicus, Torun, Poland. 8. Centre for public health and healthcare, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 9. Associazione Italiana Medici di Famiglia (AIMEF), Bologna, Italy. 10. Department of English, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun, Poland. 11. Department of general practice, université de Bretagne Occidentale, ERCR SPURBO, Brest, France. 12. Unite Inserm 1078, SFR 148 ScInBioS, faculté de médecine, université de Bretagne Occidentale, université européenne de Bretagne, 22, avenue Camille-Desmoulins, 29238 Brest cedex 2, France. 13. Primary care research center, Williamson building, Oxford Road, Manchester, United Kingdom. 14. Department of Primary and Interdisciplinary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Depression occurs frequently in primary care. Its broad clinical variability makes it difficult to diagnose. This makes it essential that family practitioner (FP) researchers have validated tools to minimize bias in studies of everyday practice. Which tools validated against psychiatric examination, according to the major depression criteria of DSM-IV or 5, can be used for research purposes? METHOD: An international FP team conducted a systematic review using the following databases: Pubmed, Cochrane and Embase, from 2000/01/01 to 2015/10/01. RESULTS: The three databases search identified 770 abstracts: 546 abstracts were analyzed after duplicates had been removed (224 duplicates); 50 of the validity studies were eligible and 4 studies were included. In 4 studies, the following tools were found: GDS-5, GDS-15, GDS-30, CESD-R, HADS, PSC-51 and HSCL-25. Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive Predictive Value, Negative Predictive Value were collected. The Youden index was calculated. DISCUSSION: Using efficiency data alone to compare these studies could be misleading. Additional reliability, reproducibility and ergonomic data will be essential for making comparisons. CONCLUSION: This study selected seven tools, usable in primary care research, for the diagnosis of depression. In order to define the best tools in terms of efficiency, reproducibility, reliability and ergonomics for research in primary care, and for care itself, further research will be essential.
INTRODUCTION:Depression occurs frequently in primary care. Its broad clinical variability makes it difficult to diagnose. This makes it essential that family practitioner (FP) researchers have validated tools to minimize bias in studies of everyday practice. Which tools validated against psychiatric examination, according to the major depression criteria of DSM-IV or 5, can be used for research purposes? METHOD: An international FP team conducted a systematic review using the following databases: Pubmed, Cochrane and Embase, from 2000/01/01 to 2015/10/01. RESULTS: The three databases search identified 770 abstracts: 546 abstracts were analyzed after duplicates had been removed (224 duplicates); 50 of the validity studies were eligible and 4 studies were included. In 4 studies, the following tools were found: GDS-5, GDS-15, GDS-30, CESD-R, HADS, PSC-51 and HSCL-25. Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive Predictive Value, Negative Predictive Value were collected. The Youden index was calculated. DISCUSSION: Using efficiency data alone to compare these studies could be misleading. Additional reliability, reproducibility and ergonomic data will be essential for making comparisons. CONCLUSION: This study selected seven tools, usable in primary care research, for the diagnosis of depression. In order to define the best tools in terms of efficiency, reproducibility, reliability and ergonomics for research in primary care, and for care itself, further research will be essential.
Authors: Michael A Grandner; Christina Hall; Anjelica Jaszewski; Pamela Alfonso-Miller; Jo-Ann Gehrels; William D S Killgore Journal: Athl Train Sports Health Care Date: 2020-08-28
Authors: Emily S Miller; William A Grobman; Jennifer Culhane; Emma Adam; Claudia Buss; Sonja Entringer; Gregory Miller; Pathik D Wadhwa; Lauren Keenan-Devlin; Ann Borders Journal: Arch Womens Ment Health Date: 2018-06-04 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Laura M Holsen; Grace Huang; Sara Cherkerzian; Sarah Aroner; Eric B Loucks; Steve Buka; Robert J Handa; Jill M Goldstein Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2021-02-02 Impact factor: 3.017
Authors: P Nabbe; J Y Le Reste; M Guillou-Landreat; E Beck-Robert; R Assenova; D Lazic; S Czachowski; S Stojanović-Špehar; M Hasanagic; H Lingner; A Clavería; M I Fernandez San Martin; A Sowinska; S Argyriadou; C Lygidakis; B Le Floch; C Doerr; T Montier; H Van Marwijk; P Van Royen Journal: BMC Res Notes Date: 2018-01-03
Authors: Patrice Nabbe; Jean Yves Le Reste; Morgane Guillou-Landreat; Florence Gatineau; Bernard Le Floch; Tristan Montier; Harm Van Marwijk; Paul Van Royen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-04-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Petteri Oura; Arto Hautala; Antti Kiviniemi; Juha Auvinen; Katri Puukka; Mikko Tulppo; Heikki Huikuri; Tapio Seppänen; Jaro Karppinen Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 2.362