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. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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.

Thyroid cancer has a small impact on patient-partner relationships and their frequency of sexual activity.

ABSTRACTObjective:This cross-sectional survey examined changes in perceived relationships and sexual activity in a sample of thyroid cancer patients and their partners, taking into account sociodemographic and disease-related variables, as well as such outcome measures as anxiety, depression, fatigue, and quality of life (QoL). METHOD: A total of 38 patients with thyroid cancer who were being treated at the department of nuclear medicine in Zürich or Lucerne over the preceding seven years, as well as their partners, completed questionnaires about the quality of their relationships (RQ), about perceptions of changes in their relationships, and about their frequency of sexual activity. They also filled out prevalidated questionnaires related to anxiety, depression, fatigue, and QoL. RESULTS: Some 17 patients (44.7%) and 16 partners (42.1 %) reported that the cancer diagnosis had changed their relationships. Of these, 10 (26.3%) patients and 9 (23.7%) partners reported positive changes only, while 7 patients (18.4%) and 7 partners (18.4%) reported mixed or negative changes. A perceived mixed/negative relationship change was associated with increased depression and lower RQ in patients and partners, as well as with increased anxiety in patients. While the frequency of sexual activity only changed in roughly half of patients and partners (16 patients [42.1%] and 20 partners [52.6%]), increased sexual activity was associated with lower physical QoL scores and a higher depression score than in counterparts who reported no change. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Compared to other cancer sites, in our sample thyroid cancer had a relatively small impact on patient-partner relationships and levels of intimacy. We found that screening patients and their partners with a simple question-"Did the diagnosis of cancer change your relationship?"-can lead to early detection of couples who are potentially at risk for perceived negative relationship changes and can facilitate timely psychosocial referral for couple's therapy.