Brett D. Thombs

Dr. Brett D. Thombs

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

26Years (2001-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
9 April 2019 in BMJ
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BLBrooke Levis
Brooke Levis
ABAndrea Benedetti
Andrea Benedetti
BTBrett D. Thombs
Brett D. Thombs
Objective To determine the accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for screening to detect major depression. Design Individual participant data meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (January 2000-February 2015). Inclusion criteria Eligible studies compared PHQ-9 scores with major depression diagnoses from validated diagnostic interviews. Primary study data and study level data extracted from primary reports were synthesized. For PHQ-9 cut-off scores 5-15, bivariate random effects meta-analysis was used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity, separately, among studies that used semistructured diagnostic interviews, which are designed for administration by clinicians; fully structured interviews, which are designed for lay administration; and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric (MINI) diagnostic interviews, a brief fully structured interview. Sensitivity and specificity were examined among participant subgroups and, separately, using meta-regression, considering all subgroup variables in a single model. Results Data were obtained for 58 of 72 eligible studies (total n=17 357; major depression cases n=2312). Combined sensitivity and specificity was maximized at a cut-off score of 10 or above among studies using a semistructured interview (29 studies, 6725 participants; sensitivity 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 0.92; specificity 0.85, 0.82 to 0.88). Across cut-off scores 5-15, sensitivity with semistructured interviews was 5-22% higher than for fully structured interviews (MINI excluded; 14 studies, 7680 participants) and 2-15% higher than for the MINI (15 studies, 2952 participants). Specificity was similar across diagnostic interviews. The PHQ-9 seems to be similarly sensitive but may be less specific for younger patients than for older patients; a cut-off score of 10 or above can be used regardless of age.. Conclusions PHQ-9 sensitivity compared with semistructured diagnostic interviews was greater than in previous conventional meta-analyses that combined reference standards. A cut-off score of 10 or above maximized combined sensitivity and specificity overall and for subgroups. Registration PROSPERO CRD42014010673.

11 November 2020 in BMJ
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BLBrooke Levis
Brooke Levis
ZNZelalem Negeri
Zelalem Negeri
YSYing Sun
Ying Sun
ABAndrea Benedetti
Andrea Benedetti
BTBrett D. Thombs
Brett D. Thombs
Objective To evaluate the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) for screening to detect major depression in pregnant and postpartum women. Design Individual participant data meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (from inception to 3 October 2018). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Eligible datasets included EPDS scores and major depression classification based on validated diagnostic interviews. Bivariate random effects meta-analysis was used to estimate EPDS sensitivity and specificity compared with semi-structured, fully structured (Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) excluded), and MINI diagnostic interviews separately using individual participant data. One stage meta-regression was used to examine accuracy by reference standard categories and participant characteristics. Results Individual participant data were obtained from 58 of 83 eligible studies (70%; 15 557 of 22 788 eligible participants (68%), 2069 with major depression). Combined sensitivity and specificity was maximised at a cut-off value of 11 or higher across reference standards. Among studies with a semi-structured interview (36 studies, 9066 participants, 1330 with major depression), sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.90) and 0.84 (0.79 to 0.88) for a cut-off value of 10 or higher, 0.81 (0.75 to 0.87) and 0.88 (0.85 to 0.91) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher, and 0.66 (0.58 to 0.74) and 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 13 or higher, respectively. Accuracy was similar across reference standards and subgroups, including for pregnant and postpartum women. Conclusions An EPDS cut-off value of 11 or higher maximised combined sensitivity and specificity; a cut-off value of 13 or higher was less sensitive but more specific. To identify pregnant and postpartum women with higher symptom levels, a cut-off of 13 or higher could be used. Lower cut-off values could be used if the intention is to avoid false negatives and identify most patients who meet diagnostic criteria. Registration PROSPERO (CRD42015024785).

1 January 2006 in Journal of General Internal Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BTBrett D. Thombs
Brett D. Thombs
EBEric B. Bass
Eric B. Bass
DFDaniel E. Ford
Daniel E. Ford
KSKerry J. Stewart
Kerry J. Stewart
KTKonstantinos K. Tsilidis
Konstantinos K. Tsilidis
RZRoy C. Ziegelstein
Roy C. Ziegelstein

9 June 2020 in JAMA
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BLBrooke Levis
Brooke Levis
YSYing Sun
Ying Sun
CHChen He
Chen He
YWYin Wu
Yin Wu
AKAnkur Krishnan
Ankur Krishnan
FCfor the Depression Screening Data (DEPRESSD) PHQ Collaboration
for the Depression Screening Data (DEPRESSD) PHQ Collaboration
In depression screening, questionnaires are used to identify patients with scores above a cutoff threshold for evaluation to determine whether depression is present.1 One strategy is to administer a brief screening tool followed by a longer tool for positive screens.2,3 The Patient Health Questionnaire–2 (PHQ-2),4 which consists of the first 2 items (depressed mood and anhedonia) of the Patient Health Questionnaire–9 (PHQ-9),5 has been recommended as a prescreen prior to administering remaining PHQ-9 items (Table 1).2,4,6,7

1 May 2011 in General Hospital Psychiatry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AMAnna Meijer
Anna Meijer
HCHenk Jan Conradi
Henk Jan Conradi
EBElisabeth H. Bos
Elisabeth H. Bos
BTBrett D. Thombs
Brett D. Thombs
JMJoost P. van Melle
Joost P. van Melle
PJPeter de Jonge
Peter de Jonge

12 November 2008 in JAMA
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BTBrett D. Thombs
Brett D. Thombs
PJPeter de Jonge
Peter de Jonge
JCJames C. Coyne
James C. Coyne
MWMary A. Whooley
Mary A. Whooley
NFNancy Frasure-Smith
Nancy Frasure-Smith
RZRoy C. Ziegelstein
Roy C. Ziegelstein
Review from JAMA — Depression Screening and Patient Outcomes in Cardiovascular Care — A Systematic Review