A comparison of the original major depression inventory with a modified version: A Danish validation study

IF 5.3 2区医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY

Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica Pub Date : 2024-01-16 DOI:10.1111/acps.13656

Henrik Schou Pedersen, Karl Bang Christensen, Anders Prior, Kaj Sparle Christensen

{"title":"A comparison of the original major depression inventory with a modified version: A Danish validation study","authors":"Henrik Schou Pedersen, Karl Bang Christensen, Anders Prior, Kaj Sparle Christensen","doi":"10.1111/acps.13656","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The Major Depression Inventory (MDI) is a patient-reported outcome measure used by general practitioners to assist with diagnosing and evaluation of the severity of a patient's depression. However, recent studies have questioned the structural validity of the MDI.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>We proposed a modified version (mMDI) of the MDI with fewer response categories and four rephrased items and aimed to compare the psychometric properties of the changes in a joint cohort of patients from general practice and mental health associations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We used Rasch analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) to assess the validity and reliability of the two versions. Equipercentile linking was used to compute cut-off points for the mMDI.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>For both versions, local dependence was found between the three item pairs (loss of interest, lack of energy), (lack of self-confidence, feelings of guilt), and (concentration problems, feeling restless/slowed down). The mMDI displayed lower measurement error in the upper end of the scale and better item level fit for three of the four reformulated items compared to the MDI. For the MDI, 5.3% of the respondents gave improbable responses; the corresponding number was 3.4% for the mMDI. The mMDI displayed better fit to a one-factor model compared to the MDI. When comparing the correlation of the scales with the WHO-5 instrument, the corresponding AUROC estimates for the mMDI and MDI were found to be 0.93 (0.92; 0.96) and 0.91 (0.87; 0.94), respectively. The cut-off points for mild, moderate, and severe depression in the mMDI were found to be 17, 20, and 23, respectively.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The proposed changes of the MDI are psychometrically sound upgrades of the original.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":108,"journal":{"name":"Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/acps.13656","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/acps.13656","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The Major Depression Inventory (MDI) is a patient-reported outcome measure used by general practitioners to assist with diagnosing and evaluation of the severity of a patient's depression. However, recent studies have questioned the structural validity of the MDI.

Objectives

We proposed a modified version (mMDI) of the MDI with fewer response categories and four rephrased items and aimed to compare the psychometric properties of the changes in a joint cohort of patients from general practice and mental health associations.

Methods

We used Rasch analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) to assess the validity and reliability of the two versions. Equipercentile linking was used to compute cut-off points for the mMDI.

Results

For both versions, local dependence was found between the three item pairs (loss of interest, lack of energy), (lack of self-confidence, feelings of guilt), and (concentration problems, feeling restless/slowed down). The mMDI displayed lower measurement error in the upper end of the scale and better item level fit for three of the four reformulated items compared to the MDI. For the MDI, 5.3% of the respondents gave improbable responses; the corresponding number was 3.4% for the mMDI. The mMDI displayed better fit to a one-factor model compared to the MDI. When comparing the correlation of the scales with the WHO-5 instrument, the corresponding AUROC estimates for the mMDI and MDI were found to be 0.93 (0.92; 0.96) and 0.91 (0.87; 0.94), respectively. The cut-off points for mild, moderate, and severe depression in the mMDI were found to be 17, 20, and 23, respectively.

Conclusion

The proposed changes of the MDI are psychometrically sound upgrades of the original.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

原始重度抑郁量表与修订版的比较：丹麦验证研究。

背景：重度抑郁量表（MDI）是一种由患者报告的结果测量方法，全科医生使用它来协助诊断和评估患者抑郁的严重程度。然而，最近的研究对 MDI 的结构有效性提出了质疑：目的：我们提出了一个改良版的 MDI（mMDI），减少了回答类别，并对四个项目进行了重新表述，旨在对来自全科医生和心理健康协会的联合组群患者的心理测量特性进行比较：我们使用拉施分析、确证因子分析和接收者操作曲线下面积（AUROC）来评估两个版本的有效性和可靠性。结果：两个版本都发现了局部依赖性：在这两个版本中，三个项目对（失去兴趣、缺乏活力）、（缺乏自信、内疚感）和（注意力不集中、感到不安/迟钝）之间都存在局部依赖性。与心理健康指数相比，心理健康指数在量表高端的测量误差较小，在四个重新制定的项目中，有三个项目的项目水平拟合度较高。在心理健康指数中，5.3% 的受访者给出了不可能的回答；而在移动心理健康指数中，相应的数字为 3.4%。与计量吸入器指数相比，移动式计量吸入器指数更适合单因素模型。在比较量表与 WHO-5 工具的相关性时，发现 mMDI 和 MDI 的相应 AUROC 估计值分别为 0.93 (0.92; 0.96) 和 0.91 (0.87; 0.94)。在 mMDI 中，轻度、中度和重度抑郁的临界点分别为 17、20 和 23：结论：从心理测量学的角度来看，所建议的 MDI 变更是对原有 MDI 的升级。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 医学-精神病学

CiteScore

11.20

自引率

3.00%

发文量

135

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica acts as an international forum for the dissemination of information advancing the science and practice of psychiatry. In particular we focus on communicating frontline research to clinical psychiatrists and psychiatric researchers. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica has traditionally been and remains a journal focusing predominantly on clinical psychiatry, but translational psychiatry is a topic of growing importance to our readers. Therefore, the journal welcomes submission of manuscripts based on both clinical- and more translational (e.g. preclinical and epidemiological) research. When preparing manuscripts based on translational studies for submission to Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, the authors should place emphasis on the clinical significance of the research question and the findings. Manuscripts based solely on preclinical research (e.g. animal models) are normally not considered for publication in the Journal.