Sensitivity and specificity of the mood disorder questionnaire and the bipolar spectrum diagnostic scale in Argentinean patients with mood disorders

Psinapsys Private Psychiatric Center, La Plata, Argentina.
Journal of Affective Disorders (Impact Factor: 3.38). 03/2011; 132(3):445-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2011.03.014
Source: PubMed


To assess the sensitivity and specificity of two self-report instruments for detection of bipolarity in a sample of Argentinean patients.
Spanish versions of the MDQ and the BSDS were administered over four months at 11 sites in Argentina. Diagnoses were made using DSM-IV criteria and the MINI. The study sample consisted of patients diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder (BD) Types I, II, or NOS. BDNOS diagnoses were made using extended guidelines for bipolar spectrum symptoms. Unipolar patients were used as a control group. Of 493 patients screened, 354 completed evaluation by MDQ and MINI, and 363 by BSDS and MINI.
Specificity of MDQ was 0.97 and BSDS was 0.81. MDQ sensitivity was 0.70 for bipolar type I (BD-I), 0.52 for bipolar II (BD-II) and 0.31 for bipolar not otherwise specified (BDNOS). BSDS sensitivities were 0.75, 0.70 and 0.51 respectively.
This study was performed in specialized outpatient settings and thus its results are not necessarily representative for other clinical settings. There was not a systematic evaluation of comorbid psychiatric disease or test-retest reliability.
The local versions of the MDQ and the BSDS showed a sensitivity and specificity comparable to previous research. Our results indicate that in this sample, MDQ was more specific for BD and BSDS was more sensitive to detect BD-II and NOS. Since BD-I is more readily recognized than bipolar spectrum disorders, enhanced sensitivity of BSDS for soft bipolarity may be an advantage.

Download full-text


Available from: Gustavo Vazquez, Oct 04, 2015
137 Reads
  • Source
    • "The findings of these studies were rather mixed. Some studies showed (very) good sensitivity and or specificity (Chung et al., 2008; Stang et al., 2007; Twiss et al., 2008; Zaratiegui et al., 2011). However, Zimmerman et al. (2009) reported inadequate sensitivity (0.64) and reasonable specificity (0.85) in a psychiatric outpatient sample. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Screening properties of the mood disorder questionnaire (MDQ) to detect bipolar disorder (BD) in patients with substance use disorders are unknown. 403 treatment seeking patients with a substance use disorder completed the MDQ and subsequently 111 MDQ positives and 59 MDQ negatives were assessed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV to diagnose BD. In addition, given the overlap with BD symptoms, the presence of borderline personality disorder (BPD), antisocial personality disorder (APD) and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), were assessed using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule and the Structured Interview for DSM-IV Personality. Of the 170 patients with a SCID interview, 35 patients (20.6%) met criteria for a lifetime diagnosis of BD. Twenty-three patients (62.8%) with BD had a positive MDQ score and 47 of the 135 patients (34.8%) without BD had a negative MDQ score resulting in a weighted sensitivity of .43, a weighted specificity of .57, a positive predictive value of .21, a negative predictive value (NPV) of .80 and an area under the curve of .50. The area under the curve of the MDQ to detect BPD, APD, ADHD and any externalizing disorder ranged from .55 (APD) to .63 (ADHD). The MDQ is not a suitable screening instrument for the detection of BD or other externalizing disorders but it could be used for ruling out the presence of BD in treatment seeking substance use disorder patients.
    Drug and alcohol dependence 02/2012; 124(3):235-41. DOI:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2012.01.018 · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Screening for clinical depression and bipolar disorder remains controversial. Screening is usually based on finding discriminating symptoms, but not all tools perform equally well. Clinicians should be able to assess the clinical utility of screening tests as well as their accuracy and acceptability. Screening for depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) has been extensively examined. Four main versions of scoring the PHQ exist. The two-item PHQ2, the nine-item PHQ9, the PHQ DSM-IV algorithm, and the two-step PHQ2 then PHQ9. Recent results suggest that the PHQ9 is more accurate than the PHQ2, and that the algorithm scoring method is preferred to the linear cut-off score. The two-step procedure has promise, but it has not been adequately tested. Two screening questions may be a useful compromise in medical settings, as they take less than 2 min, but about a quarter of patients do not receive screening even when implemented systematically. Alternative customized questionnaires have been developed in medical settings such as the Depression Screening in Parkinson's Disease DESPAR and Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E). Screening for bipolar disorders is an even greater challenge than screening for unipolar depression. Screening in primary care and the community has low positive predictive value. Screening in high-risk samples, such as those with known depression is somewhat more successful, but not yet sufficiently accurate to be used alone. Screening for depression can bring added value to routine unassisted recognition, but only if followed by good-quality treatment. Screening for bipolar disorder is not yet sufficiently accurate to be used reliably in clinical practice.
    Current opinion in psychiatry 01/2012; 25(1):24-31. DOI:10.1097/YCO.0b013e32834de45b · 3.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To identify an optimal audiometric asymmetry index for predicting tinnitus laterality. Retrospective medical record review. Data from adult tinnitus patients (80 men and 44 women) were extracted for demographic, audiometric, tinnitus laterality, and related information. The main measures were sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Three audiometric asymmetry indices were constructed using one, two, or three frequency elements to compute the average interaural threshold difference (aITD). Tinnitus laterality predictive performance of a particular index was assessed by increasing the cutoff or minimum magnitude of the aITD from 10 to 35 dB in 5-dB steps to determine its ROC curve. Single frequency index performance was inferior to the other two (P < .05). Double and triple frequency indices were indistinguishable (P > .05). Two adjoining frequency elements with aITD ≥ 15 dB performed optimally for predicting tinnitus laterality (sensitivity = 0.59, specificity = 0.71, and PPV = 0.76). Absolute and relative magnitudes of hearing loss in the poorer ear were uncorrelated with tinnitus distress. An optimal audiometric asymmetry index to predict tinnitus laterality is one whereby 15 dB is the minimum aITD of two adjoining frequencies, inclusive of the maximal ITD. Tinnitus laterality dependency on magnitude of interaural asymmetry may inform design and interpretation of neuroimaging studies. Monaural acoustic tinnitus therapy may be an initial consideration for asymmetric hearing loss meeting the criterion of aITD ≥ 15 dB.
    The Laryngoscope 05/2012; 122(5):1148-53. DOI:10.1002/lary.23242 · 2.14 Impact Factor
Show more