Suppr超能文献

验证工具以识别围产期常见精神障碍:系统评价的系统评价。

Validated tools to identify common mental disorders in the perinatal period: A systematic review of systematic reviews.

机构信息

National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU), National Department of Public Health (NDPH), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Independent researcher, UK.

出版信息

J Affect Disord. 2022 Feb 1;298(Pt A):634-643. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.11.011. Epub 2021 Nov 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty remains regarding the validity of screening tools to detect common mental disorders (CMDs) during perinatal periods. This umbrella review aims to provide an up-to-date summary of psychometric properties of tools for the identification of perinatal CMDs.

METHODS

Reviews were identified via Ovid MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE, Global Health and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews electronic databases with no date or language restriction. Pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates and ranges were extracted and summarised using forest plots. Quality assessment was conducted using Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2).

RESULTS

Of 7,891 papers identified, 31 reviews met inclusion criteria. 76 screening tools were identified; most frequently validated were Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) (n = 28 reviews), Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI) (n = 13 reviews) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) (n = 12 reviews). Forest plots demonstrated a pattern of decreasing sensitivity and increasing specificity with increasing cut-off scores. Sub-group analysis of data extracted from low quality reviews demonstrated wider 95% CIs and overall lower specificity. Validity also varied according to ethnicity, socio-economic background and age.

LIMITATIONS

Despite a low Covered Corrected Area (CCA) score the primary studies included within reviews overlapped; therefore we were unable perform meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that the EPDS, PHQ and BDI are useful across a range of diverse settings but the context of tool application is a key factor determining validity. This review highlights that utilizing screening tools in clinical practice is complex and requires careful consideration of the population, context, and health system it will be used in.

摘要

背景

在围产期,用于检测常见精神障碍(CMD)的筛查工具的有效性仍存在不确定性。本综述旨在提供围产期 CMD 识别工具的最新心理测量特性综合概述。

方法

通过 Ovid MEDLINE、PsychINFO、EMBASE、全球卫生和 Cochrane 系统评价数据库,无日期或语言限制,对综述进行了检索。使用森林图提取并总结汇总敏感性和特异性估计值及范围。使用测量工具评估系统评价(AMSTAR-2)进行质量评估。

结果

在 7891 篇论文中,有 31 篇综述符合纳入标准。确定了 76 种筛查工具;最常被验证的是爱丁堡产后抑郁量表(EPDS)(n=28 篇综述)、贝克抑郁量表(BDI)(n=13 篇综述)和患者健康问卷(PHQ)(n=12 篇综述)。森林图显示,随着截断分数的增加,敏感性降低,特异性增加。从低质量综述中提取的数据的亚组分析表明,95%CI 更宽,特异性总体较低。有效性也因种族、社会经济背景和年龄而异。

局限性

尽管涵盖校正面积(CCA)得分较低,但综述中包含的主要研究存在重叠;因此,我们无法进行荟萃分析。

结论

证据表明,EPDS、PHQ 和 BDI 在各种不同的环境中都很有用,但工具应用的背景是确定有效性的关键因素。本综述强调,在临床实践中使用筛查工具是复杂的,需要仔细考虑将在其中使用的人群、背景和卫生系统。

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