Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
Brain Behav. 2022 Jun;12(6):e2614. doi: 10.1002/brb3.2614. Epub 2022 May 19.
Individual and population level inference about risk and burden of MDD, particularly maternal MDD, is often made using case-finding tools that are imperfect and prone to misclassification error (i.e. false positives and negatives). These errors or biases are rarely accounted for and lead to inappropriate clinical decisions, inefficient allocation of scarce resources, and poor planning of maternal MDD prevention and treatment interventions. The argument that the use of existing maternal MDD case-finding instruments results in misclassification errors is not new; in fact, it has been argued for decades, but by and large its implications and particularly how to correct for these errors for valid inference is unexplored. Correction of the estimates of maternal MDD prevalence, case-finding tool sensitivity and specificity is possible and should be done to inform valid individual and population-level inferences.
个体和人群层面的抑郁障碍(MDD)风险和负担推断,特别是产妇 MDD,通常使用不完善且易发生错误分类的工具(即假阳性和假阴性)来进行。这些错误或偏差很少被考虑到,导致不适当的临床决策、稀缺资源的低效分配以及产妇 MDD 预防和治疗干预措施的规划不佳。使用现有的产妇 MDD 病例发现工具会导致错误分类这一论点并不新鲜;事实上,几十年来一直有人这样认为,但总体而言,其影响,特别是如何纠正这些错误以进行有效的推断,尚未得到探索。纠正产妇 MDD 流行率、病例发现工具敏感性和特异性的估计是可能的,应该进行这种纠正,以便对个体和人群层面进行有效的推断。