%0 Journal Article
%T Depression prevalence using the HADS-D compared to SCID major depression classification: An individual participant data meta-analysis.
%A Brehaut E
%A Neupane D
%A Levis B
%A Wu Y
%A Sun Y
%A Krishnan A
%A He C
%A Bhandari PM
%A Negeri Z
%A Riehm KE
%A Rice DB
%A Azar M
%A Yan XW
%A Imran M
%A Chiovitti MJ
%A Saadat N
%A Cuijpers P
%A Ioannidis JPA
%A Markham S
%A Patten SB
%A Ziegelstein RC
%A Henry M
%A Ismail Z
%A Loiselle CG
%A Mitchell ND
%A Tonelli M
%A Boruff JT
%A Kloda LA
%A Beraldi A
%A Braeken APBM
%A Carter G
%A Clover K
%A Conroy RM
%A Cukor D
%A da Rocha E Silva CE
%A De Souza J
%A Downing MG
%A Feinstein A
%A Ferentinos PP
%A Fischer FH
%A Flint AJ
%A Fujimori M
%A Gallagher P
%A Goebel S
%A Jetté N
%A Julião M
%A Keller M
%A Kjærgaard M
%A Love AW
%A Löwe B
%A Martin-Santos R
%A Michopoulos I
%A Navines R
%A O'Rourke SJ
%A Öztürk A
%A Pintor L
%A Ponsford JL
%A Rooney AG
%A Sánchez-González R
%A Schwarzbold ML
%A Sharpe M
%A Simard S
%A Singer S
%A Stone J
%A Tung KY
%A Turner A
%A Walker J
%A Walterfang M
%A White J
%A Benedetti A
%A Thombs BD
%J J Psychosom Res
%V 139
%N 0
%D 12 2020
%M 33069051
%F 4.62
%R 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.110256
%X Validated diagnostic interviews are required to classify depression status and estimate prevalence of disorder, but screening tools are often used instead. We used individual participant data meta-analysis to compare prevalence based on standard Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - depression subscale (HADS-D) cutoffs of ≥8 and ≥11 versus Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) major depression and determined if an alternative HADS-D cutoff could more accurately estimate prevalence.<BR>We searched Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations via Ovid, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (inception-July 11, 2016) for studies comparing HADS-D scores to SCID major depression status. Pooled prevalence and pooled differences in prevalence for HADS-D cutoffs versus SCID major depression were estimated.<BR>6005 participants (689 SCID major depression cases) from 41 primary studies were included. Pooled prevalence was 24.5% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 20.5%, 29.0%) for HADS-D ≥8, 10.7% (95% CI: 8.3%, 13.8%) for HADS-D ≥11, and 11.6% (95% CI: 9.2%, 14.6%) for SCID major depression. HADS-D ≥11 was closest to SCID major depression prevalence, but the 95% prediction interval for the difference that could be expected for HADS-D ≥11 versus SCID in a new study was -21.1% to 19.5%.<BR>HADS-D ≥8 substantially overestimates depression prevalence. Of all possible cutoff thresholds, HADS-D ≥11 was closest to the SCID, but there was substantial heterogeneity in the difference between HADS-D ≥11 and SCID-based estimates. HADS-D should not be used as a substitute for a validated diagnostic interview.