Purpose: To compare the predictive validity of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and other tools for screening depression in pregnant and postpartum women through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Methods: An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycArticles databases was conducted using the following keywords: depression, perinatal-related terms, and EPDS. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 was used to assess the risk of bias in diagnostic studies.
Results: The search identified 823 articles, of which 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. In 1831 pregnant women from nine studies, pooled sensitivity and specificity of the EPDS were 0.81 and 0.87, respectively, with summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curve of 0.90. In 515 postpartum women from six studies, pooled sensitivity, specificity, and sROC were 0.79, 0.92, and 0.90, respectively. We then compared the EPDS with other tools using three or more studies. The sROC curve of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 was 0.74, which was lower than that (0.86) of the EPDS. The sROC curve of the Beck Depression Inventory and the ten-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale was 0.91, similar to that of the EPDS (0.90 and 0.87). However, in comparison with the Postpartum Depression Screening Scale (0.98), the sROC curve of the EPDS was 0.54.
Conclusion: As a tool specialized for screening depression in pregnant and postpartum women, the EPDS showed excellent performance. Thus, the EPDS can be used in preference to other tools to screen for depression in perinatal women at a primary care setting or a midwifery center.
Keywords: Depression; Postpartum depression; Pregnant women; Sensitivity and specificity; Systematic review.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.