A systematic review of screening instruments for depression for use in antenatal services in low resource settings
Open Access
- 24 March 2017
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in BMC Psychiatry
- Vol. 17 (1), 112
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-1273-7
Abstract
In low resource settings, short, valid and reliable instruments with good high sensitivity and specificity are essential for the screening of depression in antenatal care. A review of published evidence on screening instruments for depression for use in antenatal services in low resource settings was conducted. The aim of this review was to appraise the best available evidence on screening instruments suitable for detecting depression in antenatal care in low resource settings. Searching, selection, quality assessment, and data abstraction was done by two reviewers. ScienceDirect, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, SABINET and PsychARTICLES databases were searched using relevant search terms. Retrieved studies were evaluated for relevancy (whether psychometric data were reported) and quality. Data were synthesised and sensitivity and specificity of instruments were pooled using forest plots. Eleven articles were included in the review. The methodological quality ranged from adequate to excellent. The review found 7 tools with varying levels of accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, including the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, Beck Depression Index, Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale 20, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Hopkins Symptoms Checklist-25, Kessler Psychological Distress Scale and Self-Reporting Questionnaire. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale was most common and had the highest level of accuracy (AUC = .965) and sensitivity. This review suggests that the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale can be a suitable instrument of preference for screening antenatal depression in low resource settings because of the reported level of accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. CRD42015020316 .Funding Information
- University of Malawi (QZA-0484 NORHED 2013)
This publication has 45 references indexed in Scilit:
- Health equity: evidence synthesis and knowledge translation methodsSystematic Reviews, 2013
- Grand Challenges: Integrating Maternal Mental Health into Maternal and Child Health ProgrammesPLoS Medicine, 2013
- Automated dose dispensing service for primary healthcare patients: a systematic reviewSystematic Reviews, 2013
- Comparing the accuracy of brief versus long depression screening instruments which have been validated in low and middle income countries: a systematic reviewBMC Psychiatry, 2012
- Chapter 8: Meta-analysis of Test Performance When There is a “Gold Standard”Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2012
- Assessing prenatal depression in the rural developing world: a comparison of two screening measuresArchives of Women's Mental Health, 2010
- Risk factors for depressive symptoms during pregnancy: a systematic reviewAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2010
- Forest plots in reports of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study reviewing current practiceInternational Journal of Epidemiology, 2010
- Antenatal screening for postnatal depression: a systematic reviewActa Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 2003
- The CES-D ScaleApplied Psychological Measurement, 1977