Diagnostic accuracy of case-finding questions to identify perinatal depression.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for perinatal mental health care recommend the use of two case-finding questions about depressed feelings and loss of interest in activities, despite the absence of validation studies in this context. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of these questions and of a third question about the need for help asked of women receiving perinatal care. METHODS: We evaluated self-reported responses to two case-finding questions against an interviewer-assessed diagnostic standard (DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder) among 152 women receiving antenatal care at 26-28 weeks' gestation and postnatal care at 5-13 weeks after delivery. Among women who answered "yes" to either question, we assessed the usefulness of asking a third question about the need for help. We calculated sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios for the two case-finding questions and for the added question about the need for help. RESULTS: Antenatally, the two case-finding questions had a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 77%-100%), a specificity of 68% (95% CI 58%-76%), a positive likelihood ratio of 3.03 (95% CI 2.28-4.02) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.041 (95% CI 0.003-0.63) in identifying perinatal depression. Postnatal results were similar. Among the women who screened positive antenatally, the additional question about the need for help had a sensitivity of 58% (95% CI 38%-76%), a specificity of 91% (95% CI 78%-97%), a positive likelihood ratio of 6.86 (95% CI 2.16-21.7) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.45 (95% CI 0.25-0.80), with lower sensitivity and higher specificity postnatally. INTERPRETATION: Negative responses to both of the case-finding questions showed acceptable accuracy for ruling out perinatal depression. For positive responses, the use of a third question about the need for help improved specificity and the ability to rule in depression.

Sleep health among people with severe mental ill health during the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from a linked UK population cohort study.

Objectives: Sleep problems are a transdiagnostic feature of nearly all psychiatric conditions, and a strong risk factor for initial and recurrent episodes. However, people with severe mental ill health (SMI) are often excluded from general population surveys, and as such the extent and associates of poor sleep in this population are less well understood. This study explores sleep health in an SMI sample during the COVID-19 pandemic, using multiple regression to identify risk factors, including daily routine, wellbeing and demographics. Methods: An existing cohort of people with an SMI diagnosis were sampled. Participants were invited to complete a self-report survey about their health and the impacts of COVID-19 and associated public health measures. Sleep duration, efficiency, and quality were measured using items from the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Results: Two hundred forty-nine adults (aged 21-84 years) completed the survey. Mean sleep duration and efficiency were similar to general population estimates, at 7 h 19 min and 78%, respectively. However, 43% reported "bad" sleep quality that was associated with being younger in age as well as disturbed routine and declined wellbeing. Indeed, 37% reported a disturbed routine during the pandemic. Conclusions: High estimates of perceived poor sleep quality in the SMI population align with previous findings. Supporting people with SMI to maintain routine regularity may work to protect sleep quality and wellbeing. Future research should more closely examine sleep health in people with SMI, using accessible and scalable measures of objective and subjective sleep, examining longitudinal trends.

Assessing the quality of diagnostic studies using psychometric instruments: applying QUADAS.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increase in the number of systematic reviews of diagnostic tests, which has resulted in the introduction of two checklists: statement for reporting of diagnostic accuracy (STARD) and quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS). OBJECTIVE: To examine the validity and usefulness of QUADAS when applied to diagnostic accuracy studies using psychometric instruments and to examine the quality in reporting of these studies during practical application of the checklist. METHOD: Two reviewers independently rated the quality of 54 studies using QUADAS. The proportion of agreement was used to assess overall agreement and individual agreement of QUADAS items between reviewers. RESULTS: The overall agreement between the two reviewers for all QUADAS items combined was 85.7%. The proportion of agreement between reviewers for each item ranged from just over 57-100% and was over 80% for 8 of the items. The poorest agreement was associated with the items for selection criteria, indeterminate results and withdrawals. None of the studies adequately reported all relevant information to enable all QUADAS item to be scored as 'yes'. CONCLUSION: Overall QUADAS was relatively easy to use and appears to be an acceptable tool for appraising the quality of diagnostic accuracy studies using psychometric instruments. The application of QUADAS was hampered by the poor quality of reporting encountered.

Comparison of large versus smaller randomized trials for mental health-related interventions.

OBJECTIVE: The extent of disagreement between large and smaller randomized, controlled trials on mental health issues is unknown. The authors aimed to compare the results of large versus smaller trials on mental health-related interventions. METHOD: The authors screened 161 Cochrane and 254 Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness systematic reviews on mental health-related interventions. They identified 16 meta-analyses with at least one "large" randomized trial with sample size >800 and at least one "smaller" trial. Effect sizes were calculated separately for large and smaller trials. Heterogeneity was assessed between all studies, within each group (large and smaller studies), and between large and smaller studies. RESULTS: Significant between-study heterogeneity was seen in five meta-analyses. By random-effects calculations, the results of large and smaller trials differed beyond chance in four meta-analyses (25%). In three of these disagreements (effect of day care on IQ, discontinuation of antidepressants, risperidone versus typical antipsychotics for schizophrenia), the smaller trials showed greater effect sizes than the large trials. The inverse was seen in one case (olanzapine versus typical antipsychotics for schizophrenia). With fixed-effects models, disagreements beyond chance occurred in five cases (31%). In four meta-analyses, the effect size differed over twofold between large and smaller trials. Various quality and design parameters were identified as potential explanations for some disagreements. CONCLUSIONS: Large trials are uncommon in mental health. Their results are usually comparable with the results of smaller studies, but major disagreements do occur. Both large and smaller trials should be scrutinized as they offer a continuum of randomized evidence.

Rational decision-making in mental health: the role of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: "Systematic reviews" have come to be recognized as the most rigorous method of summarizing confusing and often contradictory primary research in a transparent and reproducible manner. Their greatest impact has been in the summarization of epidemiological literature - particularly that relating to clinical effectiveness. Systematic reviews also have a potential to inform rational decision-making in healthcare policy and to form a component of economic evaluation. AIMS OF THE STUDY: This article aims to introduce the rationale behind systematic reviews and, using examples from mental health, to introduce the strengths and limitations of systematic reviews, particularly in informing mental health policy and economic evaluation. METHODS: Examples are selected from recent controversies surrounding the introduction of new psychiatric drugs (anti-depressants and anti-schizophrenia drugs) and methods of delivering psychiatric care in the community (case management and assertive community treatment). The potential for systematic reviews to (i) produce best estimates of clinical efficacy and effectiveness, (ii) aid economic evaluation and policy decision-making and (iii) highlight gaps in the primary research knowledge base are discussed. Lastly examples are selected from outside mental health to show how systematic reviews have a potential to be explicitly used in economic and health policy evaluation. RESULTS: Systematic reviews produce the best estimates of clinical efficacy, which can form an important component of economic evaluation. Importantly, serious methodological flaws and areas of uncertainty in the primary research literature are identified within an explicit framework. Summary indices of clinical effectiveness can be produced, but it is difficult to produce such summary indices of cost effectiveness by pooling economic data from primary studies. Modelling is commonly used in economic and policy evaluation. Here, systematic reviews can provide the best estimates of effectiveness and, importantly, highlight areas of uncertainty that can be used in "sensitivity analysis". DISCUSSION: Systematic reviews are an important recent methodological advance, the potential for which has only begun to be realized in mental health. This use of systematic reviews is probably most advanced in producing critical summaries of clinical effectiveness data. Systematic reviews cannot produce valid and believable conclusions when the primary research literature is of poor quality. An important function of systematic reviews will be in highlighting this poor quality research which is of little use in mental health decision making. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH PROVISION: Health care provision should be both clinically and cost effective. Systematic reviews are a key component in ensuring that this goal is achieved. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Systematic reviews have potential to inform health policy. Examples presented show that health policy is often made without due consideration of the research evidence. Systematic reviews can provide robust and believable answers, which can help inform rational decision-making. Importantly, systematic reviews can highlight the need for important primary research and can inform the design of this research such that it provides answers that will help in forming healthcare policy. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Systematic reviews should precede costly (and often unnecessary) primary research. Many areas of health policy and practice have yet to be evaluated using systematic review methodology. Methods for the summarization of economic data are methodologically complex and deserve further research

Decision curve analysis for assessing the usefulness of tests for making decisions to treat: an application to tests for prodromal psychosis.

For a test to be considered useful for making treatment decisions, it is necessary that making treatment decisions based on the results of the test be a preferable strategy to making treatment decisions without the test. Decision curve analysis is a framework for assessing when a test would be expected to be useful, which integrates evidence of a test's performance characteristics (sensitivity and specificity), condition prevalence among at-risk patients, and patient preferences for treatment. We describe decision curve analysis generally and illustrate its potential through an application to tests for prodromal psychosis. Clinical psychosis is often preceded by a prodromal phase, but not all those with prodromal symptoms proceed to develop full psychosis. Patients identified as at risk for developing psychosis may be considered for proactive treatment to mitigate development of clinically defined psychosis. Tests exist to help identify those at-risk patients most likely to develop psychosis, but it is uncertain when these tests would be considered useful for making proactive treatment decisions. We apply decision curve analysis to results from a systematic review of studies investigating clinical tests for predicting the development of psychosis in at-risk populations, and present resulting decision curves that illustrate when the tests may be expected to be useful for making proactive treatment decisions.

Should methodological filters for diagnostic test accuracy studies be used in systematic reviews of psychometric instruments? A case study involving screening for postnatal depression.

BACKGROUND: Challenges exist when searching for diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies that include the design of DTA search strategies and selection of appropriate filters. This paper compares the performance of three MEDLINE search strategies for psychometric diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies in postnatal depression. METHODS: A reference set of six relevant studies was derived from a forward citation search via Web of Knowledge. The performance of the 'target condition and index test' method recommended by the Cochrane DTA Group was compared to two alternative strategies which included methodological filters. Outcome measures were total citations retrieved, sensitivity, precision and associated 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS: The Cochrane recommended strategy and one of the filtered search strategies were equivalent in performance and both retrieved a total of 105 citations, sensitivity was 100% (95% CI 61%, 100%) and precision was 5.2% (2.6%, 11.9%). The second filtered search retrieved a total of 31 citations, sensitivity was 66.6% (30%, 90%) and precision was 12.9% (5.1%, 28.6%). This search missed the DTA study with most relevance to the DTA review. CONCLUSIONS: The Cochrane recommended search strategy, 'target condition and index test', method was pragmatic and sensitive. It was considered the optimum method for retrieval of relevant studies for a psychometric DTA review (in this case for postnatal depression). Potential limitations of using filtered searches during a psychometric mental health DTA review should be considered.

Compiling a register of patients with moderate or severe learning disabilities: experience at one United Kingdom general practice.

Background Identifying patients with learning disabilities within primary care is central to initiatives for improving the health of this population. UK general practitioners (GPs) receive additional income for maintaining registers of patients with learning disabilities as part of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), and may opt to provide Directed Enhanced Services (DES), which requires practices to maintain registers of patients with moderate or severe learning disabilities and offer them annual health checks.Objectives This paper describes the development of a register of patients with moderate or severe learning disabilities at one UK general practice.Methods A Read code search of one UK general practice's electronic medical records was conducted in order to identify patients with learning disabilities. Confirmation of diagnoses was sought by scrutinising records and GP verification. Cross-referencing with the practice QOF register of patients with learning disabilities of any severity, and the local authority's list of clients with learning disabilities, was performed.Results Of 15 001 patients, 229 (1.5%) were identified by the Read code search as possibly having learning disabilities. Scrutiny of records and GP verification confirmed 64 had learning disabilities and 24 did not, but the presence or absence of learning disability remained unclear in 141 cases. Cross-referencing with the QOF register (n=81) and local authority list (n=49) revealed little overlap.Conclusion Identifying learning disability and assessing its severity are tasks GPs may be unfamiliar with, and relying on Read code searches may result in under-detection. Further research is needed to define optimum strategies for identifying, cross-referencing and validating practice-based registers of patients with learning disabilities.

Screening and case finding for depression in offender populations: a systematic review of diagnostic properties.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of depression in offender populations is particularly difficult for health professions because of the many vulnerable complex problems associated with this population. As offender populations represent an 'at risk population', one feasible approach is the use of brief standardised mood assessments that can be either self-completed or completed by a non-specialist. AIMS: To review the diagnostic accuracy of brief psychometric instruments to identify depression in offender populations. METHOD: The authors searched five electronic databases from inception to March 2009 and examined reference lists to identify the relevant literature. The authors included studies comparing the accuracy of any brief psychometric instrument to identify depression in offender populations with a standardised diagnostic interview conducted according to internationally recognised criteria. Two reviewers independently reviewed each article to assess inclusion, extract relevant study characteristics and data. RESULTS: In total, thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Instruments validated in offender populations included both general depression questionnaires as well as specific measures that had been developed for use in offender populations. The most frequently validated instruments were the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) and the Referral Decision Scale (RDS). CONCLUSIONS: A number of different tools were identified in the review which could perhaps serve as a benchmark for the identification of depression in offender populations.

Instruments to identify post-natal depression: Which methods have been the most extensively validated, in what setting and in which language?

Abstract Objectives. To investigate which methods to identify post-natal depression are the most extensively validated, in what setting and in what language. Methods. A systematic search of the literature was undertaken to retrieve English and non-English language articles available until February 2007. This included searching 16 electronic databases, forward citation searching, personal communication with authors and inspection of reference lists. Results. A total of 60 studies (published in 64 articles) met the inclusion criteria. Four PND specific measures and nine generic depression (and sometimes anxiety) measures were found to have been validated against a diagnostic reference standard in pregnant or post-natal populations. The Edinburgh Post-natal Depression Scale (EPDS) was the most frequently validated method to identify women with PND. The EPDS has been translated and validated in 20 different languages. The majority of studies were undertaken at ante-natal clinics (n=15), after the birth in post-natal wards (n=12) or during post-natal visits or follow-up clinics (n=16). Conclusions. The EPDS is the most frequently researched method to identify PND and has been translated and validated in multiple different languages.

The prevalence of nursing staff stress on adult acute psychiatric in-patient wards. A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Concerns about recent changes in acute in-patient mental health care environments have led to fears about staff stress and poor morale in acute in-patient mental health care staff. AIM: To review the prevalence of low staff morale, stress, burnout, job satisfaction and psychological well-being amongst staff working in in-patient psychiatric wards. METHOD: Systematic review. RESULTS: Of 34 mental health studies identified, 13 were specific to acute in-patient settings, and 21 were specific to other non-specified ward-based samples. Most studies did not find very high levels of staff burnout and poor morale but were mostly small, of poor quality and provided incomplete or non-standardised prevalence data. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of indicators of low morale on acute in-patient mental health wards has been poorly researched and remains unclear. Multi-site, prospective epidemiological studies using validated measures of stress together with personal and organizational variables influencing staff stress in acute in-patient wards are required.

Outcomes research in mental health. Systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes research involves the secondary analysis of data collected routinely by clinical services, in order to judge the effectiveness of interventions and policy initiatives. It permits the study of large databases of patients who are representative of 'real world' practice. However, there are potential problems with this observational design. AIMS: To establish the strengths and limitations of outcomes research when applied in mental health. METHOD: A systematic review was made of the application of outcomes research in mental health services research. RESULTS: Nine examples of outcomes research in mental health services were found. Those that used insurance claims data have information on large numbers of patients but use surrogate outcomes that are of questionable value to clinicians and patients. Problems arise when attempting to adjust for important confounding variables using routinely collected claims data, making results difficult to interpret. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes research is unlikely to be a quick or cheap means of establishing evidence for the effectiveness of mental health practice and policy.