US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening and Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. (vol 123, pg 1223, 2009)

Pediatrics (Impact Factor: 5.47). 06/2009; 123(6):1611-1611. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2009-0876


DESCRIPTION. This is an update of the 2002 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation on screening for child and adolescent major depressive disorder. METHODS. The US Preventive Services Task Force weighed the benefits and harms of screening and treatment for major depressive disorder in children and adolescents, incorporating new evidence addressing gaps in the 2002 recommendation statement. Evidence examined included the benefits and harms of screening, the accuracy of primary care-feasible screening tests, and the benefits and risks of treating depression by using psychotherapy and/or medications in patients aged 7 to 18 years. RECOMMENDATIONS. Screen adolescents (12-18 years of age) for major depressive disorder when systems are in place to ensure accurate diagnosis, psychotherapy (cognitive-behavioral or interpersonal), and follow-up (B recommendation). Evidence is insufficient to warrant a recommendation to screen children (7-11 years of age) for major depressive disorder (I statement). Pediatrics 2009; 123: 1223-1228

2 Reads
  • Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing 09/2009; 22(3):170-1. DOI:10.1111/j.1744-6171.2009.00190.x
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of short screening questionnaires may be a promising option for identifying children at risk for depression in a community setting. The objective of this study was to assess the validity of the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ) and one- and two-item screening instruments for depressive disorders in a school-based sample of young adolescents. Participants were 521 sixth-grade students attending public middle schools. Child and parent versions of the SMFQ were administered to evaluate the child's depressive symptoms. The presence of any depressive disorder during the previous month was assessed using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC) as the criterion standard. First, we assessed the diagnostic accuracy of child, parent, and combined scores of the full 13-item SMFQ by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity. The same approach was then used to evaluate the accuracy of a two-item scale consisting of only depressed mood and anhedonia items, and a single depressed mood item. The combined child + parent SMFQ score showed the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.86). Diagnostic accuracy was lower for child (AUC = 0.73) and parent (AUC = 0.74) SMFQ versions. Corresponding versions of one- and two-item screens had lower AUC estimates, but the combined versions of the brief screens each still showed moderate accuracy. Furthermore, child and combined versions of the two-item screen demonstrated higher sensitivity (although lower specificity) than either the one-item screen or the full SMFQ. Under conditions where parents accompany children to screening settings (e.g. primary care), use of a child + parent version of the SMFQ is recommended. However, when parents are not available, and the cost of a false positive result is minimal, then a one- or two-item screen may be useful for initial identification of at-risk youth.
    Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health 02/2010; 4(1):8. DOI:10.1186/1753-2000-4-8
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Knowledge of psychopharmacology is essential for a clinical psychologist to practice his/her profession, regardless of whether one desires to become licensed to prescribe psychoactive medications. This commentary reiterates a call made almost 20 years ago for all practitioners to gain and utilize this knowledge. Without psychopharmacology knowledge, one is extremely limited in the ability to interact with medical prescribers and to optimally serve their patients as a valued member of the health care team.
    Journal of Clinical Psychology 04/2011; 67(4):446-9. DOI:10.1002/jclp.20773 · 2.12 Impact Factor
Show more