Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Introduction The prevalence of depression based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8) may vary depending on the scoring method. Objectives 1) To describe the prevalence of depression in Europe using two PHQ-8 scoring methods. 2) To identify the countries with the highest prevalence according to each method. Methods Data from 27 countries included in the European Health Survey (EHIS-2) for the year 2014/2015 were used (n=258,888). All participants who completed the PHQ-8 were included. The prevalence of depression and its 95% Confidence Interval (95%CI) were calculated overall for the whole of Europe and for each country using a PHQ-8≥10 cut-off point and the PHQ-8 algorithm scoring method. Weights derived from the complex sample design were considered for their calculation. Results The overall prevalence of depression for all Europe was lower using the PHQ-8>=10 cut-off point (6.38%, 95%CI 6.24-6.52) than the PHQ-8 algorithm (7.01%, 95%CI, 6.86-7.16). Using the PHQ-8≥10 cut-off point, the highest prevalence was observed in Iceland (10.33%, 95%CI, 9.33-11.32), Luxembourg (9.74%, 95%CI, 8.76-10.72) and Germany (9.24%, 95%CI, 8.82-9.66). Using the PHQ-8 algorithm the highest rates were observed in Hungary (10.99%, 95%CI,10.14-11.84), Portugal (10.63%, 95%CI, 9.96-11.29) and Iceland (9.80%, 95%CI, 8.77-10.83). Conclusions There is variability in the prevalence of depression rates in Europe according to the PHQ-8 scoring method. These findings suggest the necessity of identify the method of choice for each country comparing with a gold standard measure (clinical diagnosis). Countries with consistent higher prevalence of depression based on PHQ-8 regardless of scoring method deserve further study. Disclosure This work has been funded by CIBERESP (ESP21PI05)
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Torre et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: