Comparison of Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression - Depression subscale scores by administration mode: An individual participant data differential item functioning meta-analysis

Daphna Harel, Department of Applied Statistics, Social Science, and Humanities, New York University, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: daphna.harel@nyu.edu.
Yin Wu, Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Brooke Levis, Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Suiqiong Fan, Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Ying Sun, Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Mingyao Xu, Department of Applied Statistics, Social Science, and Humanities, New York University, New York, NY, USA.
Danielle B. Rice, Department of Psychology, St. Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada.
Jill Boruff, Schulich Library of Physical Sciences, Life Sciences, and Engineering, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Sarah Markham, King's College London, UK.
John P. Ioannidis, Department of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Department of Biomedical Data Science, Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Yemisi Takwoingi, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Scott B. Patten, Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Roy C. Ziegelstein, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Pim Cuijpers, Department of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Simon Gilbody, Hull York Medical School and the Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, UK.
Simone Vigod, Department of Psychiatry, Women's College Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Dickens Akena, Department of Psychiatry, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Andrea Benedetti, Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Respiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, McGill University Health Centre, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Brett D. Thombs, Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Date

6-21-2024

Journal

Journal of affective disorders

Volume

361

DOI

10.1016/j.jad.2024.06.033

Keywords

Depression; EPDS; HADS; Mode of administration; PHQ-9

Abstract

Administration mode of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may influence responses. We assessed if Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Depression subscale (HADS-D) item responses and scores were associated with administration mode. We compared (1) self-administration versus interview-administration; within self-administration (2) research or medical setting versus private; and (3) pen-and-paper versus electronic; and within interview-administration (4) in-person versus phone. We analysed individual participant data meta-analysis datasets with item-level data for the PHQ-9 (N = 34,529), EPDS (N = 16,813), and HADS-D (N = 16,768). We used multiple indicator multiple cause models to assess differential item functioning (DIF) by administration mode. We found statistically significant DIF for most items on all measures due to large samples, but influence on total scores was negligible. In 10 comparisons conducted across the PHQ-9, EPDS, and HADS-D, Pearson's correlations and intraclass correlation coefficients between latent depression symptom scores from models that did or did not account for DIF were between 0.995 and 1.000. Total PHQ-9, EPDS, and HADS-D scores did not differ materially across administration modes. Researcher and clinicians who evaluate depression symptoms with these questionnaires can select administration methods based on patient preferences, feasibility, or cost.

Department

Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS