THE VALIDITY of the MOOD DISORDER QUESTIONNAIRE for SCREENING BIPOLAR DISORDER: A META-ANALYSIS

Hee Ryung Wang, Young Sup Woo, Hyeong Sik Ahn, Il Min Ahn, Hyun Jung Kim, Won Myong Bahk

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We conducted a meta-analysis to review the diagnostic accuracy of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) among patients with mood disorders. We used a bivariate random effects model to calculate summary sensitivity and specificity. Twenty-one studies were included. At the standard or modified cutoff value of 7, summary sensitivity was.62 and summary specificity was.85. When we pooled 11 studies including both patients with bipolar disorder (BD) and those with unipolar depression, the summary sensitivity was.76 and summary specificity was.81. However, among the six studies that excluded patients with known BD, the summary sensitivity was significantly reduced to.37 and summary specificity was.88. There were no significant differences on the diagnostic accuracy of the MDQ between studies from Eastern and Western countries after adjusting for various clinical correlates. The overall diagnostic accuracy of the MDQ was relatively good. However, when the MDQ is applied among patients with depression without previous diagnoses of BD, its sensitivity was significantly reduced. This suggests that when the MDQ is applied among this population, its optimal cutoff value should be adjusted to enhance its sensitivity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)527-538
Number of pages12
JournalDepression and Anxiety
Volume32
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015 Jul 1

Keywords

  • assessment/diagnosis
  • bipolar disorder
  • depression
  • measurement/psychometrics
  • mood disorders

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'THE VALIDITY of the MOOD DISORDER QUESTIONNAIRE for SCREENING BIPOLAR DISORDER: A META-ANALYSIS'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this