Validation of the Edinburgh Depression Scale during pregnancy
Abstract Background Untreated depression during pregnancy may have adverse outcomes for the mother and her child. Screening for depression in the general pregnant population is thus recommended. The Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS) is widely used for postpartum depression screening. There is no cons...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of psychosomatic research 2011-04, Vol.70 (4), p.385-389 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 389 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 385 |
container_title | Journal of psychosomatic research |
container_volume | 70 |
creator | Bergink, Veerle Kooistra, Libbe Lambregtse-van den Berg, Mijke P Wijnen, Henny Bunevicius, Robertas van Baar, Anneloes Pop, Victor |
description | Abstract Background Untreated depression during pregnancy may have adverse outcomes for the mother and her child. Screening for depression in the general pregnant population is thus recommended. The Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS) is widely used for postpartum depression screening. There is no consensus on which EDS cutoff values to use during pregnancy. The aim of the current study was to examine the predictive validity and concurrent validity of the EDS for all three trimesters of pregnancy. Methods In a large unselected sample of 845 pregnant women, the sensitivity, specificity, and validity of the EDS were evaluated. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (depression module) was used to examine the predictive validity of the EDS. The anxiety and somatization subscales of the Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90) were used to examine its concurrent validity. Only women with a major depressive episode were considered as cases. Results The prevalence of depression decreased toward end term: 5.6%, 5.4%, and 3.4%. The EDS scores also decreased toward end term, while the SCL-90 subscale anxiety scores increased. The EDS showed high test–retest reliability and high concurrent validity with the SCL-90 anxiety and somatization subscales. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was high and varied between 0.93 and 0.97. A cutoff value of 11 in the first trimester and that of 10 in the second and third trimesters gave the most adequate combination of sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value. Conclusions The EDS is a reliable instrument for screening depression during pregnancy. A lower cutoff than commonly applied in the postpartum period is recommended. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.07.008 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_870995966</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0022399910002837</els_id><sourcerecordid>870995966</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-c0b10a818c8bbca6a9036356798366ad9e9946d6ca4fbb115df0ecb4e1da2e1a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1v1DAQhi0EokvhL6DcOGWZsRPHPoAEpXxIlTgUuFqOPdl1yCaLnVTaf4-jLSBxgZOl8TPzSs_LWIGwRUD5st_2x3Ry-ylS2nLIY2i2AOoB26BqdIlCwkO2AeC8FFrrC_YkpR4ApOb1Y3bBscKqkrBhr77ZIXg7h2kspq6Y91Rc-zC2S9zti3d0zAFp_bt1dqDCLzGMuyJPd6Md3ekpe9TZIdGz-_eSfX1__eXqY3nz-cOnqzc3pau5nEsHLYJVqJxqW2el1SCkqGWjlZDSek1aV9JLZ6uubRFr3wG5tiL0lhNacclenO8e4_RjoTSbQ0iOhsGONC3JqAa0rrWU_ybrRqHAZiXVmXRxSilSZ44xHGw8GQSzWja9-WPZrJYNNCZbzqvP70OW9kD-9-IvrRl4ewYoS7kLFE1ygUZHPkRys_FT-J-U138dcUMYQy7iO50o9dMSxyzdoEncgLld217LxtwzV6IRPwHTnKg5</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>857813176</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Validation of the Edinburgh Depression Scale during pregnancy</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Bergink, Veerle ; Kooistra, Libbe ; Lambregtse-van den Berg, Mijke P ; Wijnen, Henny ; Bunevicius, Robertas ; van Baar, Anneloes ; Pop, Victor</creator><creatorcontrib>Bergink, Veerle ; Kooistra, Libbe ; Lambregtse-van den Berg, Mijke P ; Wijnen, Henny ; Bunevicius, Robertas ; van Baar, Anneloes ; Pop, Victor</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background Untreated depression during pregnancy may have adverse outcomes for the mother and her child. Screening for depression in the general pregnant population is thus recommended. The Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS) is widely used for postpartum depression screening. There is no consensus on which EDS cutoff values to use during pregnancy. The aim of the current study was to examine the predictive validity and concurrent validity of the EDS for all three trimesters of pregnancy. Methods In a large unselected sample of 845 pregnant women, the sensitivity, specificity, and validity of the EDS were evaluated. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (depression module) was used to examine the predictive validity of the EDS. The anxiety and somatization subscales of the Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90) were used to examine its concurrent validity. Only women with a major depressive episode were considered as cases. Results The prevalence of depression decreased toward end term: 5.6%, 5.4%, and 3.4%. The EDS scores also decreased toward end term, while the SCL-90 subscale anxiety scores increased. The EDS showed high test–retest reliability and high concurrent validity with the SCL-90 anxiety and somatization subscales. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was high and varied between 0.93 and 0.97. A cutoff value of 11 in the first trimester and that of 10 in the second and third trimesters gave the most adequate combination of sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value. Conclusions The EDS is a reliable instrument for screening depression during pregnancy. A lower cutoff than commonly applied in the postpartum period is recommended.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-3999</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1360</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.07.008</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21414460</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JPCRAT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Anxiety-Depression ; Clinical assessment ; Cutoff value ; Depression ; Depression - diagnosis ; Depression - psychology ; Depressive Disorder - diagnosis ; Depressive Disorder - psychology ; EDS ; Female ; Humans ; Mass Screening ; Postnatal depression ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Complications - diagnosis ; Pregnancy Complications - psychology ; Pregnant women ; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales - standards ; Psychiatry ; Psychometrics ; Reproducibility of Results ; Screening ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Somatization ; Validation</subject><ispartof>Journal of psychosomatic research, 2011-04, Vol.70 (4), p.385-389</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2011 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-c0b10a818c8bbca6a9036356798366ad9e9946d6ca4fbb115df0ecb4e1da2e1a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-c0b10a818c8bbca6a9036356798366ad9e9946d6ca4fbb115df0ecb4e1da2e1a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022399910002837$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,30977,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21414460$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bergink, Veerle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kooistra, Libbe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lambregtse-van den Berg, Mijke P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wijnen, Henny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bunevicius, Robertas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Baar, Anneloes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pop, Victor</creatorcontrib><title>Validation of the Edinburgh Depression Scale during pregnancy</title><title>Journal of psychosomatic research</title><addtitle>J Psychosom Res</addtitle><description>Abstract Background Untreated depression during pregnancy may have adverse outcomes for the mother and her child. Screening for depression in the general pregnant population is thus recommended. The Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS) is widely used for postpartum depression screening. There is no consensus on which EDS cutoff values to use during pregnancy. The aim of the current study was to examine the predictive validity and concurrent validity of the EDS for all three trimesters of pregnancy. Methods In a large unselected sample of 845 pregnant women, the sensitivity, specificity, and validity of the EDS were evaluated. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (depression module) was used to examine the predictive validity of the EDS. The anxiety and somatization subscales of the Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90) were used to examine its concurrent validity. Only women with a major depressive episode were considered as cases. Results The prevalence of depression decreased toward end term: 5.6%, 5.4%, and 3.4%. The EDS scores also decreased toward end term, while the SCL-90 subscale anxiety scores increased. The EDS showed high test–retest reliability and high concurrent validity with the SCL-90 anxiety and somatization subscales. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was high and varied between 0.93 and 0.97. A cutoff value of 11 in the first trimester and that of 10 in the second and third trimesters gave the most adequate combination of sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value. Conclusions The EDS is a reliable instrument for screening depression during pregnancy. A lower cutoff than commonly applied in the postpartum period is recommended.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anxiety-Depression</subject><subject>Clinical assessment</subject><subject>Cutoff value</subject><subject>Depression</subject><subject>Depression - diagnosis</subject><subject>Depression - psychology</subject><subject>Depressive Disorder - diagnosis</subject><subject>Depressive Disorder - psychology</subject><subject>EDS</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Mass Screening</subject><subject>Postnatal depression</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Complications - diagnosis</subject><subject>Pregnancy Complications - psychology</subject><subject>Pregnant women</subject><subject>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales - standards</subject><subject>Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Screening</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Somatization</subject><subject>Validation</subject><issn>0022-3999</issn><issn>1879-1360</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1v1DAQhi0EokvhL6DcOGWZsRPHPoAEpXxIlTgUuFqOPdl1yCaLnVTaf4-jLSBxgZOl8TPzSs_LWIGwRUD5st_2x3Ry-ylS2nLIY2i2AOoB26BqdIlCwkO2AeC8FFrrC_YkpR4ApOb1Y3bBscKqkrBhr77ZIXg7h2kspq6Y91Rc-zC2S9zti3d0zAFp_bt1dqDCLzGMuyJPd6Md3ekpe9TZIdGz-_eSfX1__eXqY3nz-cOnqzc3pau5nEsHLYJVqJxqW2el1SCkqGWjlZDSek1aV9JLZ6uubRFr3wG5tiL0lhNacclenO8e4_RjoTSbQ0iOhsGONC3JqAa0rrWU_ybrRqHAZiXVmXRxSilSZ44xHGw8GQSzWja9-WPZrJYNNCZbzqvP70OW9kD-9-IvrRl4ewYoS7kLFE1ygUZHPkRys_FT-J-U138dcUMYQy7iO50o9dMSxyzdoEncgLld217LxtwzV6IRPwHTnKg5</recordid><startdate>20110401</startdate><enddate>20110401</enddate><creator>Bergink, Veerle</creator><creator>Kooistra, Libbe</creator><creator>Lambregtse-van den Berg, Mijke P</creator><creator>Wijnen, Henny</creator><creator>Bunevicius, Robertas</creator><creator>van Baar, Anneloes</creator><creator>Pop, Victor</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QJ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110401</creationdate><title>Validation of the Edinburgh Depression Scale during pregnancy</title><author>Bergink, Veerle ; Kooistra, Libbe ; Lambregtse-van den Berg, Mijke P ; Wijnen, Henny ; Bunevicius, Robertas ; van Baar, Anneloes ; Pop, Victor</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-c0b10a818c8bbca6a9036356798366ad9e9946d6ca4fbb115df0ecb4e1da2e1a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anxiety-Depression</topic><topic>Clinical assessment</topic><topic>Cutoff value</topic><topic>Depression</topic><topic>Depression - diagnosis</topic><topic>Depression - psychology</topic><topic>Depressive Disorder - diagnosis</topic><topic>Depressive Disorder - psychology</topic><topic>EDS</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Mass Screening</topic><topic>Postnatal depression</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Complications - diagnosis</topic><topic>Pregnancy Complications - psychology</topic><topic>Pregnant women</topic><topic>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales - standards</topic><topic>Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Screening</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Somatization</topic><topic>Validation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bergink, Veerle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kooistra, Libbe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lambregtse-van den Berg, Mijke P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wijnen, Henny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bunevicius, Robertas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Baar, Anneloes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pop, Victor</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>Journal of psychosomatic research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bergink, Veerle</au><au>Kooistra, Libbe</au><au>Lambregtse-van den Berg, Mijke P</au><au>Wijnen, Henny</au><au>Bunevicius, Robertas</au><au>van Baar, Anneloes</au><au>Pop, Victor</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Validation of the Edinburgh Depression Scale during pregnancy</atitle><jtitle>Journal of psychosomatic research</jtitle><addtitle>J Psychosom Res</addtitle><date>2011-04-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>70</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>385</spage><epage>389</epage><pages>385-389</pages><issn>0022-3999</issn><eissn>1879-1360</eissn><coden>JPCRAT</coden><abstract>Abstract Background Untreated depression during pregnancy may have adverse outcomes for the mother and her child. Screening for depression in the general pregnant population is thus recommended. The Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS) is widely used for postpartum depression screening. There is no consensus on which EDS cutoff values to use during pregnancy. The aim of the current study was to examine the predictive validity and concurrent validity of the EDS for all three trimesters of pregnancy. Methods In a large unselected sample of 845 pregnant women, the sensitivity, specificity, and validity of the EDS were evaluated. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (depression module) was used to examine the predictive validity of the EDS. The anxiety and somatization subscales of the Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90) were used to examine its concurrent validity. Only women with a major depressive episode were considered as cases. Results The prevalence of depression decreased toward end term: 5.6%, 5.4%, and 3.4%. The EDS scores also decreased toward end term, while the SCL-90 subscale anxiety scores increased. The EDS showed high test–retest reliability and high concurrent validity with the SCL-90 anxiety and somatization subscales. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was high and varied between 0.93 and 0.97. A cutoff value of 11 in the first trimester and that of 10 in the second and third trimesters gave the most adequate combination of sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value. Conclusions The EDS is a reliable instrument for screening depression during pregnancy. A lower cutoff than commonly applied in the postpartum period is recommended.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>21414460</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.07.008</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-3999 |
ispartof | Journal of psychosomatic research, 2011-04, Vol.70 (4), p.385-389 |
issn | 0022-3999 1879-1360 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_870995966 |
source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Adult Anxiety-Depression Clinical assessment Cutoff value Depression Depression - diagnosis Depression - psychology Depressive Disorder - diagnosis Depressive Disorder - psychology EDS Female Humans Mass Screening Postnatal depression Pregnancy Pregnancy Complications - diagnosis Pregnancy Complications - psychology Pregnant women Psychiatric Status Rating Scales - standards Psychiatry Psychometrics Reproducibility of Results Screening Sensitivity and Specificity Somatization Validation |
title | Validation of the Edinburgh Depression Scale during pregnancy |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T14%3A47%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Validation%20of%20the%20Edinburgh%20Depression%20Scale%20during%20pregnancy&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20psychosomatic%20research&rft.au=Bergink,%20Veerle&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=70&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=385&rft.epage=389&rft.pages=385-389&rft.issn=0022-3999&rft.eissn=1879-1360&rft.coden=JPCRAT&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.07.008&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E870995966%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=857813176&rft_id=info:pmid/21414460&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0022399910002837&rfr_iscdi=true |