Probability of major depression diagnostic classification based on the SCID, CIDI and MINI diagnostic interviews controlling for Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – Depression subscale scores: an individual participant data meta-analysis of 73 prima

OBJECTIVE: Two previous individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) found that different diagnostic interviews classify different proportions of people as having major depression overall or by symptom levels. We compared the odds of major depression classification across diagnostic interviews among studies that administered the Depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D). METHODS: Data accrued for an IPDMA on HADS-D diagnostic accuracy were analysed. We fit binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare odds of major depression classification for the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), controlling for HADS-D scores and participant characteristics with and without an interaction term between interview and HADS-D scores. RESULTS: There were 15,856 participants (1942 [12%] with major depression) from 73 studies, including 15,335 (97%) non-psychiatric medical patients, 164 (1%) partners of medical patients, and 357 (2%) healthy adults. The MINI (27 studies, 7345 participants, 1066 major depression cases) classified participants as having major depression more often than the CIDI (10 studies, 3023 participants, 269 cases) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.70 (0.84, 3.43)) and the semi-structured SCID (36 studies, 5488 participants, 607 cases) (aOR = 1.52 (1.01, 2.30)). The odds ratio for major depression classification with the CIDI was less likely to increase as HADS-D scores increased than for the SCID (interaction aOR = 0.92 (0.88, 0.96)). CONCLUSION: Compared to the SCID, the MINI may diagnose more participants as having major depression, and the CIDI may be less responsive to symptom severity

Comparison of the accuracy of the 7-item HADS Depression subscale and 14-item total HADS for screening for major depression: A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

The seven-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Depression subscale (HADS-D) and the total score of the 14-item HADS (HADS-T) are both used for major depression screening. Compared to the HADS-D, the HADS-T includes anxiety items and requires more time to complete. We compared the screening accuracy of the HADS-D and HADS-T for major depression detection. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis and fit bivariate random effects models to assess diagnostic accuracy among participants with both HADS-D and HADS-T scores. We identified optimal cutoffs, estimated sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals, and compared screening accuracy across paired cutoffs via two-stage and individual-level models. We used a 0.05 equivalence margin to assess equivalency in sensitivity and specificity. 20,700 participants (2,285 major depression cases) from 98 studies were included. Cutoffs of ≥7 for the HADS-D (sensitivity 0.79 [0.75, 0.83], specificity 0.78 [0.75, 0.80]) and ≥15 for the HADS-T (sensitivity 0.79 [0.76, 0.82], specificity 0.81 [0.78, 0.83]) minimized the distance to the top-left corner of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Across all sets of paired cutoffs evaluated, differences of sensitivity between HADS-T and HADS-D ranged from -0.05 to 0.01 (0.00 at paired optimal cutoffs), and differences of specificity were within 0.03 for all cutoffs (0.02-0.03). The pattern was similar among outpatients, although the HADS-T was slightly (not nonequivalently) more specific among inpatients. The accuracy of HADS-T was equivalent to the HADS-D for detecting major depression. In most settings, the shorter HADS-D would be preferred

Probability of major depression diagnostic classification based on the SCID, CIDI and MINI diagnostic interviews controlling for Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – Depression subscale scores: An individual participant data meta-analysis of 73 primary studies

Objective: Two previous individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) found that different diagnostic interviews classify different proportions of people as having major depression overall or by symptom levels. We compared the odds of major depression classification across diagnostic interviews among studies that administered the Depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D). Methods: Data accrued for an IPDMA on HADS-D diagnostic accuracy were analysed. We fit binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare odds of major depression classification for the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), controlling for HADS-D scores and participant characteristics with and without an interaction term between interview and HADS-D scores. Results: There were 15,856 participants (1942 [12%] with major depression) from 73 studies, including 15,335 (97%) non-psychiatric medical patients, 164 (1%) partners of medical patients, and 357 (2%) healthy adults. The MINI (27 studies, 7345 participants, 1066 major depression cases) classified participants as having major depression more often than the CIDI (10 studies, 3023 participants, 269 cases) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.70 (0.84, 3.43)) and the semi-structured SCID (36 studies, 5488 participants, 607 cases) (aOR = 1.52 (1.01, 2.30)). The odds ratio for major depression classification with the CIDI was less likely to increase as HADS-D scores increased than for the SCID (interaction aOR = 0.92 (0.88, 0.96)). Conclusion: Compared to the SCID, the MINI may diagnose more participants as having major depression, and the CIDI may be less responsive to symptom severity

Probability of major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI diagnostic interviews: A synthesis of three individual participant data meta-analyses

Introduction: 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. Objective: To compare the odds of the major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI. Methods: 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. Results: 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). Conclusions: 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.</p

Measurements of the groomed and ungroomed jet angularities in pp collisions at s \sqrt{s} = 5.02 TeV

International audienceThe jet angularities are a class of jet substructure observables which characterize the angular and momentum distribution of particles within jets. These observables are sensitive to momentum scales ranging from perturbative hard scatterings to nonperturbative fragmentation into final-state hadrons. We report measurements of several groomed and ungroomed jet angularities in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 5.02 TeV with the ALICE detector. Jets are reconstructed using charged particle tracks at midrapidity (|η| < 0.9). The anti-k$_{T}$ algorithm is used with jet resolution parameters R = 0.2 and R = 0.4 for several transverse momentum {p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{ch}} ^{jet} intervals in the 20–100 GeV/c range. Using the jet grooming algorithm Soft Drop, the sensitivity to softer, wide-angle processes, as well as the underlying event, can be reduced in a way which is well-controlled in theoretical calculations. We report the ungroomed jet angularities, λ$_{α}$, and groomed jet angularities, λ$_{α,g}$, to investigate the interplay between perturbative and nonperturbative effects at low jet momenta. Various angular exponent parameters α = 1, 1.5, 2, and 3 are used to systematically vary the sensitivity of the observable to collinear and soft radiation. Results are compared to analytical predictions at next-to-leading-logarithmic accuracy, which provide a generally good description of the data in the perturbative regime but exhibit discrepancies in the nonperturbative regime. Moreover, these measurements serve as a baseline for future ones in heavy-ion collisions by providing new insight into the interplay between perturbative and nonperturbative effects in the angular and momentum substructure of jets. They supply crucial guidance on the selection of jet resolution parameter, jet transverse momentum, and angular scaling variable for jet quenching studies.[graphic not available: see fulltext

Enhanced deuteron coalescence probability in jets

The transverse-momentum (pT) spectra and coalescence parameters B2 of (anti)deuterons are measured in pp collisions at s√=13 TeV for the first time in and out of jets. In this measurement, the direction of the leading particle with the highest pT in the event (pleadT>5 GeV/c) is used as an approximation for the jet axis. The event is consequently divided into three azimuthal regions and the jet signal is obtained as the difference between the Toward region, that contains jet fragmentation products in addition to the underlying event (UE), and the Transverse region, which is dominated by the UE. The coalescence parameter in the jet is found to be approximately a factor of 10 larger than that in the underlying event. This experimental observation is consistent with the coalescence picture and can be attributed to the smaller average phase-space distance between nucleons inside the jet cone as compared to the underlying event. The results presented in this Letter are compared to predictions from a simple nucleon coalescence model, where the phase space distributions of nucleons are generated using PYTHIA 8 with the Monash 2013 tuning, and to predictions from a deuteron production model based on ordinary nuclear reactions with parametrized energy-dependent cross sections tuned on data. The latter model is implemented in PYTHIA 8.3. Both models reproduce the observed large difference between in-jet and out-of-jet coalescence parameters, although the almost flat trend of the BJet2 is not reproduced by the models, which instead give a decreasing trend

Inclusive quarkonium production in pp collisions at s=5.02\sqrt{s} = 5.02 TeV

This article reports on the inclusive production cross section of several quarkonium states, $\mathrm{J}/\psi$, $\psi {\rm (2S)}$, $\Upsilon\rm(1S)$, $\Upsilon\rm(2S)$, and $\Upsilon\rm(3S)$, measured with the ALICE detector at the LHC, in \pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 5.02$ TeV. The analysis is performed in the dimuon decay channel at forward rapidity ($2.5 < y < 4$). The measured cross sections, assuming unpolarized quarkonia, are: $\sigma_{\mathrm{J}/\psi} = 5.88 \pm 0.03 \pm 0.34\ \mu$b, $\sigma_{\psi {\rm (2S)}} = 0.87 \pm 0.06 \pm 0.10\ \mu$b, $\sigma_{\Upsilon\rm(1S)} = 45.5 \pm 3.9 \pm 3.5$ nb, $\sigma_{\Upsilon\rm(2S)} = 22.4 \pm 3.2 \pm 2.7$ nb, and $\sigma_{\Upsilon\rm(3S)} = 4.9 \pm 2.2 \pm 1.0$ nb, where the first (second) uncertainty is the statistical (systematic) one. The transverse-momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) and rapidity ($y$) differential cross sections for $\mathrm{J}/\psi$, $\psi {\rm (2S)}$, $\Upsilon\rm(1S)$, and the $\psi {\rm (2S)}$-to-$\mathrm{J}/\psi$ cross section ratios are presented. For the first time, the cross sections of the three $\Upsilon$ states, as well as the $\psi {\rm (2S)}$ one as a function of $p_{\rm T}$ and $y$, are measured at $\sqrt{s} = 5.02$ TeV at forward rapidity. These measurements also significantly extend the $\mathrm{J}/\psi$$p_{\rm T}$ reach with respect to previously published results. A comparison with ALICE measurements in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 2.76$, 7, 8, and 13 TeV is presented and the energy dependence of quarkonium production cross sections is discussed. Finally, the results are compared with the predictions from several production models