• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
The Accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Algorithm for Screening to Detect Major Depression: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis.患者健康问卷-9 算法筛查检测重度抑郁症的准确性:一项个体参与者数据荟萃分析。
Psychother Psychosom. 2020;89(1):25-37. doi: 10.1159/000502294. Epub 2019 Oct 8.
2
Accuracy of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for screening to detect major depression: individual participant data meta-analysis.患者健康问卷-9(PHQ-9)筛查检测主要抑郁症的准确性:个体参与者数据荟萃分析。
BMJ. 2019 Apr 9;365:l1476. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l1476.
3
Accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for screening to detect major depression: updated systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.患者健康问卷-9 用于筛查主要抑郁症的准确性:更新的系统评价和个体参与者数据荟萃分析。
BMJ. 2021 Oct 5;375:n2183. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n2183.
4
Accuracy of the PHQ-2 Alone and in Combination With the PHQ-9 for Screening to Detect Major Depression: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.单独使用 PHQ-2 与 PHQ-9 联合使用进行筛查以检测重度抑郁症的准确性:系统评价和荟萃分析。
JAMA. 2020 Jun 9;323(22):2290-2300. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.6504.
5
Accuracy of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Depression subscale (HADS-D) to screen for major depression: systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.医院焦虑和抑郁量表抑郁分量表(HADS-D)筛查重度抑郁症的准确性:系统评价和个体参与者数据荟萃分析。
BMJ. 2021 May 10;373:n972. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n972.
6
The diagnostic accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2), Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for detecting major depression: protocol for a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analyses.患者健康问卷-2(PHQ-2)、患者健康问卷-8(PHQ-8)和患者健康问卷-9(PHQ-9)用于检测重度抑郁症的诊断准确性:系统评价与个体患者数据荟萃分析方案
Syst Rev. 2014 Oct 27;3:124. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-124.
7
Equivalency of the diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.PHQ-8 和 PHQ-9 诊断准确性的等效性:系统评价和个体参与者数据荟萃分析。
Psychol Med. 2020 Jun;50(8):1368-1380. doi: 10.1017/S0033291719001314. Epub 2019 Jul 12.
8
Probability of major depression diagnostic classification using semi-structured versus fully structured diagnostic interviews.使用半结构化与完全结构化诊断访谈对重度抑郁症诊断分类的可能性。
Br J Psychiatry. 2018 Jun;212(6):377-385. doi: 10.1192/bjp.2018.54. Epub 2018 May 2.
9
A diagnostic meta-analysis of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) algorithm scoring method as a screen for depression.患者健康问卷-9(PHQ-9)算法评分方法作为抑郁症筛查工具的诊断性荟萃分析。
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2015 Jan-Feb;37(1):67-75. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2014.09.009. Epub 2014 Sep 23.
10
External validation of a shortened screening tool using individual participant data meta-analysis: A case study of the Patient Health Questionnaire-Dep-4.基于个体参与者数据的荟萃分析对缩短版筛查工具进行外部验证:以患者健康问卷抑郁量表-4 为例的研究。
Methods. 2022 Aug;204:300-311. doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2021.11.005. Epub 2021 Nov 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Association of brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels at different trimesters and new-onset depressive symptom in the third trimester among pregnant women: a longitudinal study.孕期不同孕周脑源性神经营养因子水平与孕晚期新发抑郁症状的关联:一项纵向研究
Front Psychiatry. 2025 Jul 31;16:1618041. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1618041. eCollection 2025.
2
Association of Dexmedetomidine With Postoperative Depressive Symptoms in Older Surgical Patients: A Prospective Multicenter Study.右美托咪定与老年外科手术患者术后抑郁症状的关联:一项前瞻性多中心研究
CNS Neurosci Ther. 2025 May;31(5):e70407. doi: 10.1111/cns.70407.
3
Uncovering hidden depression: the critical role of depression screening in sleep disorders at U.S. sleep centers.揭示隐匿性抑郁症:抑郁症筛查在美国睡眠中心睡眠障碍中的关键作用。
Front Psychiatry. 2025 Apr 25;16:1449360. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1449360. eCollection 2025.
4
Prevalence of depressive symptoms and associated factors in Brazilian older adults: 2019 Brazilian National Health Survey.巴西老年人抑郁症状的患病率及相关因素:2019年巴西全国健康调查
Cad Saude Publica. 2025 Feb 7;40(12):e00006124. doi: 10.1590/0102-311XEN006124. eCollection 2025.
5
Is there a mental health diagnostic crisis in primary care? Current research practices in global mental health cannot answer that question.初级保健中是否存在心理健康诊断危机?全球心理健康领域当前的研究实践无法回答这个问题。
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2025 Jan 30;34:e7. doi: 10.1017/S2045796025000010.
6
DREAM: an adaptive, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of duloxetine for reducing leg pain in people with chronic sciatica-trial protocol.DREAM:一项关于度洛西汀减轻慢性坐骨神经痛患者腿部疼痛的适应性、随机、安慰剂对照试验——试验方案
BMJ Open. 2024 Dec 31;14(12):e096796. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-096796.
7
Depression and health literacy among adolescents and adults in Germany: findings from two representative samples.德国青少年和成年人的抑郁与健康素养:来自两个代表性样本的研究结果
Front Psychol. 2024 Dec 11;15:1494333. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1494333. eCollection 2024.
8
COVID-19 Pandemic Increases the Risk of Anxiety and Depression among Adolescents: A Cross-Sectional Study in Rural West Bengal, India.新冠疫情增加青少年焦虑和抑郁风险:印度西孟加拉邦农村地区的一项横断面研究
Diseases. 2024 Oct 1;12(10):233. doi: 10.3390/diseases12100233.
9
Accuracy of Alternative PHQ-9 Scoring Algorithms to Screen for Depression in People Living With HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa.用于撒哈拉以南非洲地区艾滋病毒感染者抑郁症筛查的替代PHQ-9评分算法的准确性
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2025 Feb 1;98(2):143-149. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000003551.
10
Patient-reported outcome measures in type 1 diabetes outpatient care.1型糖尿病门诊护理中的患者报告结局指标
Hippokratia. 2024 Jan-Mar;28(1):17-21.

本文引用的文献

1
Accuracy of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for screening to detect major depression: individual participant data meta-analysis.患者健康问卷-9(PHQ-9)筛查检测主要抑郁症的准确性:个体参与者数据荟萃分析。
BMJ. 2019 Apr 9;365:l1476. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l1476.
2
Depression: Screening and Diagnosis.抑郁症:筛查与诊断。
Am Fam Physician. 2018 Oct 15;98(8):508-515.
3
The Clinimetric Approach to Psychological Assessment: A Tribute to Per Bech, MD (1942-2018).心理评估的临床测量方法:向医学博士佩尔·贝希(1942 - 2018)致敬。
Psychother Psychosom. 2018;87(6):321-326. doi: 10.1159/000493746. Epub 2018 Sep 28.
4
Probability of major depression diagnostic classification using semi-structured versus fully structured diagnostic interviews.使用半结构化与完全结构化诊断访谈对重度抑郁症诊断分类的可能性。
Br J Psychiatry. 2018 Jun;212(6):377-385. doi: 10.1192/bjp.2018.54. Epub 2018 May 2.
5
Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: The PRISMA-DTA Statement.诊断测试准确性研究的系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目:PRISMA-DTA 声明。
JAMA. 2018 Jan 23;319(4):388-396. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.19163.
6
The prevalence of depression and the accuracy of depression screening tools in migraine patients.偏头痛患者中抑郁的流行率和抑郁筛查工具的准确性。
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2017 Sep;48:25-31. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2017.06.006. Epub 2017 Jun 15.
7
The criterion validity of the web-based Major Depression Inventory when used on clinical suspicion of depression in primary care.基于网络的重度抑郁量表在基层医疗中用于临床怀疑抑郁症时的效标效度。
Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jul 6;9:355-365. doi: 10.2147/CLEP.S132913. eCollection 2017.
8
Screening for depression: Rasch analysis of the structural validity of the PHQ-9 in acutely injured trauma survivors.抑郁症筛查:急性创伤幸存者中患者健康问卷-9(PHQ-9)结构效度的拉施分析
J Psychosom Res. 2017 Jun;97:18-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.03.117. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
9
Risk of Bias from Inclusion of Currently Diagnosed or Treated Patients in Studies of Depression Screening Tool Accuracy: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Recently Published Primary Studies and Meta-Analyses.抑郁症筛查工具准确性研究中纳入当前已确诊或正在接受治疗患者的偏倚风险:近期发表的原发性研究和荟萃分析的横断面分析
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 26;11(2):e0150067. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150067. eCollection 2016.
10
Screening for Depression in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.成人抑郁症筛查:美国预防服务工作组推荐声明。
JAMA. 2016 Jan 26;315(4):380-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.18392.

患者健康问卷-9 算法筛查检测重度抑郁症的准确性:一项个体参与者数据荟萃分析。

The Accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Algorithm for Screening to Detect Major Depression: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

出版信息

Psychother Psychosom. 2020;89(1):25-37. doi: 10.1159/000502294. Epub 2019 Oct 8.

DOI:10.1159/000502294
PMID:31593971
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6960351/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Screening for major depression with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) can be done using a cutoff or the PHQ-9 diagnostic algorithm. Many primary studies publish results for only one approach, and previous meta-analyses of the algorithm approach included only a subset of primary studies that collected data and could have published results.

OBJECTIVE

To use an individual participant data meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of two PHQ-9 diagnostic algorithms for detecting major depression and compare accuracy between the algorithms and the standard PHQ-9 cutoff score of ≥10.

METHODS

Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, Web of Science (January 1, 2000, to February 7, 2015). Eligible studies that classified current major depression status using a validated diagnostic interview.

RESULTS

Data were included for 54 of 72 identified eligible studies (n participants = 16,688, n cases = 2,091). Among studies that used a semi-structured interview, pooled sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) were 0.57 (0.49, 0.64) and 0.95 (0.94, 0.97) for the original algorithm and 0.61 (0.54, 0.68) and 0.95 (0.93, 0.96) for a modified algorithm. Algorithm sensitivity was 0.22-0.24 lower compared to fully structured interviews and 0.06-0.07 lower compared to the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Specificity was similar across reference standards. For PHQ-9 cutoff of ≥10 compared to semi-structured interviews, sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) were 0.88 (0.82-0.92) and 0.86 (0.82-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

The cutoff score approach appears to be a better option than a PHQ-9 algorithm for detecting major depression.

摘要

背景

使用病人健康问卷-9(PHQ-9)进行主要抑郁症筛查,可以使用截止值或 PHQ-9 诊断算法。许多主要研究仅发布一种方法的结果,并且之前使用算法方法进行的荟萃分析仅包括收集数据并可能发表结果的主要研究的一个子集。

目的

使用个体参与者数据荟萃分析评估两种 PHQ-9 诊断算法检测重度抑郁症的准确性,并比较算法和标准 PHQ-9 截止值≥10 之间的准确性。

方法

Medline、Medline In-Process 和其他非索引引文、PsycINFO、Web of Science(2000 年 1 月 1 日至 2015 年 2 月 7 日)。合格的研究使用经过验证的诊断访谈来分类当前的重度抑郁症状态。

结果

纳入了 72 项合格研究中的 54 项(n 参与者=16688,n 病例=2091)。在使用半结构化访谈的研究中,原始算法的 pooled 敏感性和特异性(95%置信区间)为 0.57(0.49,0.64)和 0.95(0.94,0.97),而改良算法为 0.61(0.54,0.68)和 0.95(0.93,0.96)。与完全结构化访谈相比,算法敏感性低 0.22-0.24,与 Mini 国际神经精神病访谈相比低 0.06-0.07。特异性在参考标准之间相似。与半结构化访谈相比,PHQ-9 截止值≥10 的敏感性和特异性(95%置信区间)分别为 0.88(0.82-0.92)和 0.86(0.82-0.88)。

结论

与 PHQ-9 算法相比,截止值方法似乎是检测重度抑郁症的更好选择。