Back

Evaluation of applicability of the online version of HADS-D for depression phenotype screening in the general population

Kibitov, A. A.; Rakitko, A. S.; Kasyanov, E. D.; Rukavishnikov, G. V.; Kozlova, K. A.; Ilinsky, V. V.; Neznanov, N. G.; Mazo, G. E.; Kibitov, A. O.

2020-10-20 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2020.10.16.20213843 medRxiv
Show abstract

One of the most promising areas of research into the biological underpinnings of depression is genetic studies. However, the absence of generally accepted phenotyping methods leads to the difficulties in generalizing their results due to the heterogeneity of the samples. Thus, the development of a reliable and convenient phenotyping method that allows large sample sizes to be included in studies remains a top priority for the further development of genetic studies of depression. The aim of this study was to evaluate the applicability of the online version of the depression subscale of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D) for depression phenotype screening in the general population. Using online HADS-D we performed screening of depressive symptoms and compared results with known population patterns of depression. We conducted an online survey of 2610 Russian-speaking respondents over the age of 18. The overall HADS-D score was higher in women (p=0.003), in individuals under 30 y.o compared to participants over 42 y.o. (p=0.004) and in individuals reporting cardiovascular diseases (CVD) symptoms (p<0.0001). Linear regression showed that the presence of CVD leads to higher HADS-D scores (p<0.001), male gender (p=0.002) and older age (p<0.001) led to lower scores. Logistic regression showed that CVD increases the risk of having depression symptoms by HADS-D (p=0.033, OR=1.29), older age (p=0.015, OR=0.87) and male sex (as a trend, p=0.052, OR=0.80) decrease this risk. These results are consistent with the known data on the association of sex, age, and the presence of CVD with the prevalence of depression. The online version of HADS-D, given the ease of its usage, can be regarded as an effective tool for phenotyping depression in the general population.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
25.7%
2
Journal of Affective Disorders
81 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
10.1%
3
Acta Neuropsychiatrica
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.2%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.4%
50% of probability mass above
5
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.4%
6
Translational Psychiatry
219 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
7
Brain and Behavior
37 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 50%
2.1%
9
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
10
Journal of Psychiatric Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
11
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
12
Journal of Affective Disorders Reports
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
13
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.5%
14
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
15
Cells
232 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
16
BMC Psychiatry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
17
Journal of Psychopharmacology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
18
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
19
Public Health
34 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
Pharmaceuticals
33 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
21
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
22
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
23
European Psychiatry
10 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%