Diagnostic accuracy of scales for depression screening in patients with heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis

C. Cassiani-Miranda, M. Rueda, Paul Anthony Camacho
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy of scales for depression screening in patients with heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"C. Cassiani-Miranda, M. Rueda, Paul Anthony Camacho","doi":"10.32997/rcb-2022-3934","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: despite the existence of recommendations for the screening depressive symptoms in patients with cardiovascular disease and heart failure (HF), there are no comparative data regarding the performance of psychometric scales used in patients with HF. This study compares the psychometric performance of screening scales used for depressive symptoms in such patients. Methods: PRISMA declaration recommendations were used for the systematic review. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, SCOPUS, Lilacs, Australasian Medical Index and the African Index from January 2000 to February 2016 were used for the search. The eligible articles were published in any language and they assessed the psychometric properties of screening scales for depressive symptoms in patients with HF. QUADAS-2 criteria was used for quality assessment, and a meta-analysis developed through a hierarchical model obtained the cluster estimations for sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, predictive values, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: the initial search identified 1238 citations; only three gathered the inclusion criteria for quantitative assessment. The combined sensitivity and specificity was 56% (95% IC: 45-67%; T2=0.05) and 98% (95% IC: 96-99%; T2=0.01) respectively. The area under the curve was 0.92 (95% IC: 0.90-0.94). The variables related with the index test, reference test, Global QUDAS-2 score, and language predicted heterogeneity. Limitations: significant heterogeneity, small number of studies, selective cutoff report, and the lack of a cost-effectiveness analysis. Conclusions: The GDS-15, HADS-D, PHQ-9, CAT-D and PROMIS scales performed similarly with high specificity values.","PeriodicalId":34802,"journal":{"name":"Revista Ciencias Biomedicas","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Ciencias Biomedicas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32997/rcb-2022-3934","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: despite the existence of recommendations for the screening depressive symptoms in patients with cardiovascular disease and heart failure (HF), there are no comparative data regarding the performance of psychometric scales used in patients with HF. This study compares the psychometric performance of screening scales used for depressive symptoms in such patients. Methods: PRISMA declaration recommendations were used for the systematic review. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, SCOPUS, Lilacs, Australasian Medical Index and the African Index from January 2000 to February 2016 were used for the search. The eligible articles were published in any language and they assessed the psychometric properties of screening scales for depressive symptoms in patients with HF. QUADAS-2 criteria was used for quality assessment, and a meta-analysis developed through a hierarchical model obtained the cluster estimations for sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, predictive values, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: the initial search identified 1238 citations; only three gathered the inclusion criteria for quantitative assessment. The combined sensitivity and specificity was 56% (95% IC: 45-67%; T2=0.05) and 98% (95% IC: 96-99%; T2=0.01) respectively. The area under the curve was 0.92 (95% IC: 0.90-0.94). The variables related with the index test, reference test, Global QUDAS-2 score, and language predicted heterogeneity. Limitations: significant heterogeneity, small number of studies, selective cutoff report, and the lack of a cost-effectiveness analysis. Conclusions: The GDS-15, HADS-D, PHQ-9, CAT-D and PROMIS scales performed similarly with high specificity values.
心力衰竭患者抑郁筛查量表的诊断准确性:系统回顾和荟萃分析
引言:尽管有关于筛查心血管疾病和心力衰竭(HF)患者抑郁症状的建议,但没有关于HF患者使用的心理测量量表表现的比较数据。本研究比较了这些患者抑郁症状筛查量表的心理测量表现。方法:采用PRISMA申报建议进行系统回顾。MEDLINE、EMBASE、心理学和行为科学收藏、SCOPUS、丁香、澳大拉西亚医学指数和2000年1月至2016年2月的非洲指数用于搜索。符合条件的文章以任何语言发表,他们评估了HF患者抑郁症状筛查量表的心理测量特性。QUADAS-2标准用于质量评估,通过分层模型开发的荟萃分析获得了敏感性、特异性、似然比、预测值的聚类估计,以及95%置信区间的诊断优势比(DOR)。结果:首次检索共发现1238篇引文;只有三个收集了定量评估的纳入标准。综合敏感性和特异性分别为56%(95%IC:45-67%;T2=0.05)和98%(95%IC:96-99%;T2=0.01)。曲线下面积为0.92(95%IC:0.90-0.94)。与指数测试、参考测试、全球QUDAS-2评分和语言相关的变量预测了异质性。局限性:显著的异质性,研究数量少,选择性截止报告,缺乏成本效益分析。结论:GDS-15、HADS-D、PHQ-9、CAT-D和PROMIS量表表现相似,特异性高。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信