The Major Depression Inventory for diagnosing according to DSM-5 and ICD-11: Psychometric properties and validity in a Swedish general population

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research Pub Date : 2023-04-12 DOI:10.1002/mpr.1966
Andreas Lundin, Jette Möller, Yvonne Forsell
{"title":"The Major Depression Inventory for diagnosing according to DSM-5 and ICD-11: Psychometric properties and validity in a Swedish general population","authors":"Andreas Lundin,&nbsp;Jette Möller,&nbsp;Yvonne Forsell","doi":"10.1002/mpr.1966","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The Major Depression Inventory (MDI) was constructed to assess DSM-IV and ICD-10 depression symptoms, and does not fully cover the symptoms listed in DSM-5 and ICD-11. This study aimed to augment the MDI to the new diagnostic standards by adding a new item, and to assess and compare the measurement performance of the MDI items and diagnostic algorithms for major depression according to DSM-IV, ICD-10, DSM-5 and ICD-11.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Surveys collected 2001–2003 and 2021, including self-assessed MDI were used. A new hopelessness item was constructed and analyzed alongside the hopelessness item in the Symptom Checklist. The performance of items was compared using Rasch and Mokken analyses. Criterion validity was examined using equivalent diagnoses from psychiatric interview (Schedules for Clinical Assessments in Neuropsychiatry [SCAN]) as standard.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>MDI information was provided by 8511 individuals in 2001–2003 (SCAN subsample <i>n</i> = 878), and 8863 in 2021. All items, including hopelessness had good psychometric properties. Sensitivity ranged between 56% and 70%, and specificity between 95% and 96%, indicating similar criterion validity.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Hopelessness and the MDI items had good psychometrics. MDI for DSM-5 and ICD-11 had similar validity as for DSM-IV and ICD-10. We recommend that MDI is updated to DSM-5 and ICD-11 by adding a hopelessness item.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50310,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/mpr.1966","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mpr.1966","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objectives

The Major Depression Inventory (MDI) was constructed to assess DSM-IV and ICD-10 depression symptoms, and does not fully cover the symptoms listed in DSM-5 and ICD-11. This study aimed to augment the MDI to the new diagnostic standards by adding a new item, and to assess and compare the measurement performance of the MDI items and diagnostic algorithms for major depression according to DSM-IV, ICD-10, DSM-5 and ICD-11.

Methods

Surveys collected 2001–2003 and 2021, including self-assessed MDI were used. A new hopelessness item was constructed and analyzed alongside the hopelessness item in the Symptom Checklist. The performance of items was compared using Rasch and Mokken analyses. Criterion validity was examined using equivalent diagnoses from psychiatric interview (Schedules for Clinical Assessments in Neuropsychiatry [SCAN]) as standard.

Results

MDI information was provided by 8511 individuals in 2001–2003 (SCAN subsample n = 878), and 8863 in 2021. All items, including hopelessness had good psychometric properties. Sensitivity ranged between 56% and 70%, and specificity between 95% and 96%, indicating similar criterion validity.

Conclusions

Hopelessness and the MDI items had good psychometrics. MDI for DSM-5 and ICD-11 had similar validity as for DSM-IV and ICD-10. We recommend that MDI is updated to DSM-5 and ICD-11 by adding a hopelessness item.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
根据DSM-5和ICD-11诊断的重度抑郁症量表:瑞典普通人群的心理测量特性和有效性。
目的:重度抑郁量表(MDI)的构建是为了评估DSM-IV和ICD-10的抑郁症状,并没有完全涵盖DSM-5和ICD-11中列出的症状。本研究的目的是通过增加新的诊断项目将MDI扩展到新的诊断标准,并根据DSM-IV、ICD-10、icd -5和ICD-11对MDI项目和诊断算法的测量性能进行评估和比较。方法:使用2001-2003年和2021年收集的调查,包括自评MDI。在症状检查表中,我们构建了一个新的绝望项目并对其进行了分析。使用Rasch和Mokken分析比较了项目的性能。标准效度采用精神病学访谈的等效诊断(神经精神病学临床评估表[SCAN])作为标准。结果:2001-2003年共提供MDI信息8511人(SCAN子样本n = 878), 2021年共提供MDI信息8863人。包括绝望在内的所有项目都具有良好的心理测量特性。灵敏度在56%至70%之间,特异性在95%至96%之间,表明相似的标准有效性。结论:绝望和MDI项目具有良好的心理测量效果。DSM-5和ICD-11的MDI效度与DSM-IV和ICD-10相似。我们建议将MDI更新到DSM-5和ICD-11,增加一个绝望项目。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
6.50%
发文量
48
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research (MPR) publishes high-standard original research of a technical, methodological, experimental and clinical nature, contributing to the theory, methodology, practice and evaluation of mental and behavioural disorders. The journal targets in particular detailed methodological and design papers from major national and international multicentre studies. There is a close working relationship with the US National Institute of Mental Health, the World Health Organisation (WHO) Diagnostic Instruments Committees, as well as several other European and international organisations. MPR aims to publish rapidly articles of highest methodological quality in such areas as epidemiology, biostatistics, generics, psychopharmacology, psychology and the neurosciences. Articles informing about innovative and critical methodological, statistical and clinical issues, including nosology, can be submitted as regular papers and brief reports. Reviews are only occasionally accepted. MPR seeks to monitor, discuss, influence and improve the standards of mental health and behavioral neuroscience research by providing a platform for rapid publication of outstanding contributions. As a quarterly journal MPR is a major source of information and ideas and is an important medium for students, clinicians and researchers in psychiatry, clinical psychology, epidemiology and the allied disciplines in the mental health field.
期刊最新文献
Design of a multicenter randomized controlled trial of a post-discharge suicide prevention intervention for high-risk psychiatric inpatients: The Veterans Coordinated Community Care Study. The Holland Sleep Disorders Questionnaire: Factorial structure and measurement invariance in a psychiatric sample relative to the general population. Correction to “Validation of the German version of the 25-item hikikomori questionnaire 25” Developing an accurate and efficient tool for the internalizing spectrum: A simulation study of the adaptive algorithm to the Inventory of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms II (IDAS-II) Developing a transdiagnostic Ecological Momentary Assessment protocol for psychopathology
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1