Equivalency of the diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis
Publication date
2020-06
Authors
Wu, Yin
Levis, Brooke
Riehm, Kira E
Saadat, Nazanin
Levis, Alexander W
Azar, Marleine
Rice, Danielle B
Boruff, Jill
Cuijpers, Pim
Gilbody, Simon
Editors
Advisors
Supervisors
Document Type
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
License
taverne
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Item 9 of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) queries about thoughts of death and self-harm, but not suicidality. Although it is sometimes used to assess suicide risk, most positive responses are not associated with suicidality. The PHQ-8, which omits Item 9, is thus increasingly used in research. We assessed equivalency of total score correlations and the diagnostic accuracy to detect major depression of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9. METHODS: We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis. We fit bivariate random-effects models to assess diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: 16 742 participants (2097 major depression cases) from 54 studies were included. The correlation between PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 scores was 0.996 (95% confidence interval 0.996 to 0.996). The standard cutoff score of 10 for the PHQ-9 maximized sensitivity + specificity for the PHQ-8 among studies that used a semi-structured diagnostic interview reference standard (N = 27). At cutoff 10, the PHQ-8 was less sensitive by 0.02 (-0.06 to 0.00) and more specific by 0.01 (0.00 to 0.01) among those studies (N = 27), with similar results for studies that used other types of interviews (N = 27). For all 54 primary studies combined, across all cutoffs, the PHQ-8 was less sensitive than the PHQ-9 by 0.00 to 0.05 (0.03 at cutoff 10), and specificity was within 0.01 for all cutoffs (0.00 to 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 total scores were similar. Sensitivity may be minimally reduced with the PHQ-8, but specificity is similar.
Keywords
Depression, diagnostic accuracy, individual participant data meta-analysis, meta-analysis, PHQ-8, PHQ-9, screening, systematic review, Taverne, Psychiatry and Mental health, Applied Psychology, Journal Article
Citation
Wu, Y, Levis, B, Riehm, K E, Saadat, N, Levis, A W, Azar, M, Rice, D B, Boruff, J, Cuijpers, P, Gilbody, S, Ioannidis, J P A, Kloda, L A, McMillan, D, Patten, S B, Shrier, I, Ziegelstein, R C, Akena, D H, Arroll, B, Ayalon, L, Baradaran, H R, Baron, M, Bombardier, C H, Butterworth, P, Carter, G, Chagas, M H, Chan, J C N, Cholera, R, Conwell, Y, de Man-van Ginkel, J M, Fann, J R, Fischer, F H, Fung, D, Gelaye, B, Goodyear-Smith, F, Greeno, C G, Hall, B J, Harrison, P A, Härter, M, Hegerl, U, Hides, L, Hobfoll, S E, Hudson, M, Hyphantis, T, Inagaki, M D, Jetté, N, Khamseh, M E, Kiely, K M, Kwan, Y, Lamers, F, Liu, S-I, Lotrakul, M, Loureiro, S R, Löwe, B, McGuire, A, Mohd-Sidik, S, Munhoz, T N, Muramatsu, K, Osório, F L, Patel, V, Pence, B W, Persoons, P, Picardi, A, Reuter, K, Rooney, A G, Santos, I S, Shaaban, J, Sidebottom, A, Simning, A, Stafford, M D, Sung, S, Tan, P L L, Turner, A, van Weert, H C, White, J, Whooley, M A, Winkley, K, Yamada, M, Benedetti, A & Thombs, B D 2020, 'Equivalency of the diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 : a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis', Psychological Medicine, vol. 50, no. 8, pp. 1368-1380. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291719001314