Are we validly assessing major depression disorder risk and associated factors among mothers of young children? A cross-sectional study involving home visitation programs

Arthur H Owora, Hélène Carabin, Tabitha Garwe, Michael P Anderson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Failure to account for misclassification error accruing from imperfect case-finding instruments can produce biased estimates of suspected major depression disorder (MDD) risk factor associations. The objective of this study was to estimate the impact of misclassification error on the magnitude of measures of association between suspected risk factors and MDD assessed using the Center of Epidemiological Studies on Depression-Short Form during the prenatal and postnatal periods. Baseline data were collected from 520 mothers participating in two home visitation studies in Oklahoma City between 2010 and 2014. A Bayesian binomial latent class model was used to compare the prevalence proportion ratio (PPR) between suspected risk factors and MDD with and without adjustment for misclassification error and confounding by period of MDD symptom on-set. Adjustment for misclassification error and confounding by period of MDD on-set (prenatal vs postnatal) showed that the association between suspected risk factors and MDD is underestimated (-) and overestimated (+) differentially in different source populations of low-income mothers. The median bias in the magnitude of PPR estimates ranged between -.47 (95% Bayesian Credible Intervals [BCI]: -10.67, 1.90) for intimate partner violence to +.06 (95%BCI: -0.37, 0.47) for race/ethnicity among native-born US residents. Among recent Hispanic immigrants, bias ranged from -.77 (95%BCI: -15.31, 0.96) for history of childhood maltreatment to +.10 (95%BCI: -0.17, 0.39) for adequacy of family resources. Overall, the extent of bias on measures of association between maternal MDD and suspected risk factors is considerable without adjustment for misclassification error and is even higher for confounding by period of MDD assessment. Consideration of these biases in MDD prevention research is warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e0209735
JournalPLoS One
Volume14
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

cross-sectional studies
risk factors
Cross-Sectional Studies
Mothers
Depression
violence
postpartum period
nationalities and ethnic groups
childhood
immigration
epidemiological studies
Poverty
Population Groups
Hispanic Americans
Epidemiologic Studies
Research

Cite this

Are we validly assessing major depression disorder risk and associated factors among mothers of young children? A cross-sectional study involving home visitation programs. / Owora, Arthur H; Carabin, Hélène; Garwe, Tabitha; Anderson, Michael P.

In: PLoS One, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2019, p. e0209735.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Owora, Arthur H ; Carabin, Hélène ; Garwe, Tabitha ; Anderson, Michael P. / Are we validly assessing major depression disorder risk and associated factors among mothers of young children? A cross-sectional study involving home visitation programs. In: PLoS One. 2019 ; Vol. 14, No. 1. pp. e0209735.
@article{5ad74d305fcf4397a19f8f03e0252c1d,
title = "Are we validly assessing major depression disorder risk and associated factors among mothers of young children?: A cross-sectional study involving home visitation programs",
abstract = "Failure to account for misclassification error accruing from imperfect case-finding instruments can produce biased estimates of suspected major depression disorder (MDD) risk factor associations. The objective of this study was to estimate the impact of misclassification error on the magnitude of measures of association between suspected risk factors and MDD assessed using the Center of Epidemiological Studies on Depression-Short Form during the prenatal and postnatal periods. Baseline data were collected from 520 mothers participating in two home visitation studies in Oklahoma City between 2010 and 2014. A Bayesian binomial latent class model was used to compare the prevalence proportion ratio (PPR) between suspected risk factors and MDD with and without adjustment for misclassification error and confounding by period of MDD symptom on-set. Adjustment for misclassification error and confounding by period of MDD on-set (prenatal vs postnatal) showed that the association between suspected risk factors and MDD is underestimated (-) and overestimated (+) differentially in different source populations of low-income mothers. The median bias in the magnitude of PPR estimates ranged between -.47 (95{\%} Bayesian Credible Intervals [BCI]: -10.67, 1.90) for intimate partner violence to +.06 (95{\%}BCI: -0.37, 0.47) for race/ethnicity among native-born US residents. Among recent Hispanic immigrants, bias ranged from -.77 (95{\%}BCI: -15.31, 0.96) for history of childhood maltreatment to +.10 (95{\%}BCI: -0.17, 0.39) for adequacy of family resources. Overall, the extent of bias on measures of association between maternal MDD and suspected risk factors is considerable without adjustment for misclassification error and is even higher for confounding by period of MDD assessment. Consideration of these biases in MDD prevention research is warranted.",
author = "Owora, {Arthur H} and H{\'e}l{\`e}ne Carabin and Tabitha Garwe and Anderson, {Michael P}",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0209735",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "e0209735",
journal = "PLoS One",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Are we validly assessing major depression disorder risk and associated factors among mothers of young children?

T2 - A cross-sectional study involving home visitation programs

AU - Owora, Arthur H

AU - Carabin, Hélène

AU - Garwe, Tabitha

AU - Anderson, Michael P

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Failure to account for misclassification error accruing from imperfect case-finding instruments can produce biased estimates of suspected major depression disorder (MDD) risk factor associations. The objective of this study was to estimate the impact of misclassification error on the magnitude of measures of association between suspected risk factors and MDD assessed using the Center of Epidemiological Studies on Depression-Short Form during the prenatal and postnatal periods. Baseline data were collected from 520 mothers participating in two home visitation studies in Oklahoma City between 2010 and 2014. A Bayesian binomial latent class model was used to compare the prevalence proportion ratio (PPR) between suspected risk factors and MDD with and without adjustment for misclassification error and confounding by period of MDD symptom on-set. Adjustment for misclassification error and confounding by period of MDD on-set (prenatal vs postnatal) showed that the association between suspected risk factors and MDD is underestimated (-) and overestimated (+) differentially in different source populations of low-income mothers. The median bias in the magnitude of PPR estimates ranged between -.47 (95% Bayesian Credible Intervals [BCI]: -10.67, 1.90) for intimate partner violence to +.06 (95%BCI: -0.37, 0.47) for race/ethnicity among native-born US residents. Among recent Hispanic immigrants, bias ranged from -.77 (95%BCI: -15.31, 0.96) for history of childhood maltreatment to +.10 (95%BCI: -0.17, 0.39) for adequacy of family resources. Overall, the extent of bias on measures of association between maternal MDD and suspected risk factors is considerable without adjustment for misclassification error and is even higher for confounding by period of MDD assessment. Consideration of these biases in MDD prevention research is warranted.

AB - Failure to account for misclassification error accruing from imperfect case-finding instruments can produce biased estimates of suspected major depression disorder (MDD) risk factor associations. The objective of this study was to estimate the impact of misclassification error on the magnitude of measures of association between suspected risk factors and MDD assessed using the Center of Epidemiological Studies on Depression-Short Form during the prenatal and postnatal periods. Baseline data were collected from 520 mothers participating in two home visitation studies in Oklahoma City between 2010 and 2014. A Bayesian binomial latent class model was used to compare the prevalence proportion ratio (PPR) between suspected risk factors and MDD with and without adjustment for misclassification error and confounding by period of MDD symptom on-set. Adjustment for misclassification error and confounding by period of MDD on-set (prenatal vs postnatal) showed that the association between suspected risk factors and MDD is underestimated (-) and overestimated (+) differentially in different source populations of low-income mothers. The median bias in the magnitude of PPR estimates ranged between -.47 (95% Bayesian Credible Intervals [BCI]: -10.67, 1.90) for intimate partner violence to +.06 (95%BCI: -0.37, 0.47) for race/ethnicity among native-born US residents. Among recent Hispanic immigrants, bias ranged from -.77 (95%BCI: -15.31, 0.96) for history of childhood maltreatment to +.10 (95%BCI: -0.17, 0.39) for adequacy of family resources. Overall, the extent of bias on measures of association between maternal MDD and suspected risk factors is considerable without adjustment for misclassification error and is even higher for confounding by period of MDD assessment. Consideration of these biases in MDD prevention research is warranted.

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0209735

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0209735

M3 - Article

C2 - 30615650

VL - 14

SP - e0209735

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 1

ER -