Probability of Major Depression Classification Based on the SCID, CIDI and MINI Diagnostic Interviews : A Synthesis of Three Individual Participant Data Meta-Analyses

Three previous individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) reported that, compared to the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM (SCID), alternative reference standards, primarily the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), tended to misclassify major depression status, when controlling for depression symptom severity. However, there was an important lack of precision in the results.To compare the odds of the major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI.We included and standardized data from 3 IPDMA databases. For each IPDMA, separately, we fitted binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of major depression classification, controlling for symptom severity and characteristics of participants, and the interaction between interview and symptom severity. Next, we synthesized results using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis.In total, 69,405 participants (7,574 [11%] with major depression) from 212 studies were included. Controlling for symptom severity and participant characteristics, the MINI (74 studies; 25,749 participants) classified major depression more often than the SCID (108 studies; 21,953 participants; aOR 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.92]). Classification odds for the CIDI (30 studies; 21,703 participants) and the SCID did not differ overall (aOR 1.19; 95% CI 0.79-1.75); however, as screening scores increased, the aOR increased less for the CIDI than the SCID (interaction aOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.80).Compared to the SCID, the MINI classified major depression more often. The odds of the depression classification with the CIDI increased less as symptom levels increased. Interpretation of research that uses diagnostic interviews to classify depression should consider the interview characteristics

Current status of postnatal depression smartphone applications available on application stores: an information quality analysis.

OBJECTIVES: It is the aim of the current research to identify some common functionalities of postnatal application, and to determine the quality of the information content of postnatal depression application using validated scales that have been applied for applications in other specialties. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: To determine the information quality of the postnatal depression smartphone applications, the two most widely used smartphone application stores, namely Apple iTunes as well as Google Android Play store, were searched between 20May and 31 May. No participants were involved. The inclusion criteria for the application were that it must have been searchable using the keywords 'postnatal', 'pregnancy', 'perinatal', 'postpartum' and 'depression', and must be in English language. INTERVENTION: The Silberg Scale was used in the assessment of the information quality of the smartphone applications. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURE: The information quality score was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Our current results highlighted that while there is currently a myriad of applications, only 14 applications are specifically focused on postnatal depression. In addition, the majority of the currently available applications on the store have only disclosed their last date of modification as well as ownership. There remain very limited disclosures about the information of the authors, as well as the references for the information included in the application itself. The average score for the Silberg Scale for the postnatal applications we have analysed is 3.0. CONCLUSIONS: There remains a need for healthcare professionals and developers to jointly conceptualise new applications with better information quality and evidence base

The CBCL/1½–5’s DSM-ASD Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analyses Across 24 Societies

Previous research supports the CBCL/1½–5’s DSM-ASD scale (and its precursor, the DSM-PDP scale) as a Level 1 ASD screener. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) with data from population samples in 24 societies (N = 19,850) indicated good measurement invariance across societies, especially for configural and metric invariance. Items 4. 25, 67, 80, and 98 may be especially good discriminators of ASD because they have tend to have low base rates, strong loadings on the ASD latent construct, and the best measurement invariance across societies. Further research is needed to test the discriminative power of these items in predicting ASD, but our strong measurement findings support the international psychometric robustness of the CBCL/1½–5’s DSM-ASD scale

International Comparisons of Behavioral and Emotional Problems in Preschool Children: Parents' Reports From 24 Societies

International comparisons were conducted of preschool children's behavioral and emotional problems as reported on the Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 11/2-5 by parents in 24 societies (N=19,850). Item ratings were aggregated into scores on syndromes; Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-oriented scales; a Stress Problems scale; and Internalizing, Externalizing, and Total Problems scales. Effect sizes for scale score differences among the 24 societies ranged from small to medium (3-12%). Although societies differed greatly in language, culture, and other characteristics, Total Problems scores for 18 of the 24 societies were within 7.1 points of the omnicultural mean of 33.3 (on a scale of 0-198). Gender and age differences, as well as gender and age interactions with society, were all very small (effect sizes1%). Across all pairs of societies, correlations between mean item ratings averaged .78, and correlations between internal consistency alphas for the scales averaged .92, indicating that the rank orders of mean item ratings and internal consistencies of scales were very similar across diverse societies