Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 2/2016

01-04-2016 | Original Research Article

Patient-Centered Research to Support the Development of the Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder Scale (SMDDS): Initial Qualitative Research

Authors: Kelly P. McCarrier, Linda S. Deal, Lucy Abraham, Steven I. Blum, Elizabeth Nicole Bush, Mona L. Martin, Michael E. Thase, Stephen Joel Coons, On behalf of the PRO Consortium’s Depression Working Group

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 2/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Content valid, patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures of major depressive disorder (MDD) symptoms are needed to assess MDD treatment benefit. While a range of questionnaires are currently available to evaluate aspects of depression from the patient’s perspective, their comprehensiveness and qualitative development histories are unclear.

Objective

The objective of this study was to describe the process and results of the preliminary qualitative development of a new symptom-based PRO measure intended to assess treatment benefit in MDD clinical trials.

Methods

Qualitative interviews were conducted with adult MDD patients in the USA who recently experienced a major depressive episode. Experienced interviewers conducted concept elicitation (CE) and cognitive interviews using semi-structured interview guides. The CE interview guide was used to elicit spontaneous reports of symptom experiences along with probing to further explore and confirm concepts. The cognitive interview guide was developed to evaluate concept relevance, understandability, and structure of the draft items, and to facilitate further instrument refinement.

Results

Forty patients participated in the CE interviews. A total of 3022 symptom codes, representing 84 different concepts were derived from the transcripts. Data from the CE interviews were considered alongside existing literature and clinical expert opinion during an item-generation process, leading to development of a preliminary version of the Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder Scale (SMDDS). Fifteen patients participated in three waves of cognitive interviews, during which the SMDDS was further refined.

Conclusions

The SMDDS is a 35-item PRO measure intended for use as an endpoint in MDD clinical trials to support medical product labeling. The SMDDS uses a 7-day recall period and verbal rating scales. It was developed in accordance with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s PRO Guidance and best practices. Qualitative interviews have provided evidence for content validity. Future quantitative studies will confirm the SMDDS’s measurement properties and support FDA qualification.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kessler RC, Demler O, Frank RG, Olfson M, Pincus HA, Walters EE, et al. Prevalence and treatment of mental disorders, 1990 to 2003. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2515–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kessler RC, Demler O, Frank RG, Olfson M, Pincus HA, Walters EE, et al. Prevalence and treatment of mental disorders, 1990 to 2003. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2515–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Greenberg PE, Fournier AA, Sisitsky T, Pike CT, Kessler RC. The economic burden of adults with major depressive disorder in the United States (2005 and 2010). J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(2):155–62.CrossRefPubMed Greenberg PE, Fournier AA, Sisitsky T, Pike CT, Kessler RC. The economic burden of adults with major depressive disorder in the United States (2005 and 2010). J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(2):155–62.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013.
4.
go back to reference Hamilton M. A rating scale for depression. J Neurol Neurosur Psychiatry. 1960;23:56–62.CrossRef Hamilton M. A rating scale for depression. J Neurol Neurosur Psychiatry. 1960;23:56–62.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Montgomery SA, Åsberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry. 1979;134:382–9.CrossRefPubMed Montgomery SA, Åsberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry. 1979;134:382–9.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Foley DL, Neale MC, Gardner CO, Pickles A, Kendler KS. Major depression and associated impairment: same or different genetic and environmental risk factors? Am J Psychiatry. 2003;160:2128–33.CrossRefPubMed Foley DL, Neale MC, Gardner CO, Pickles A, Kendler KS. Major depression and associated impairment: same or different genetic and environmental risk factors? Am J Psychiatry. 2003;160:2128–33.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Uher R, Perlis RH, Placentino A, Dernovšek MA, Henigsberg N, Mors O, et al. Self-report and clinician-rated measures of depression severity: can one replace the other? Depress Anxiety. 2012;29:1043–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Uher R, Perlis RH, Placentino A, Dernovšek MA, Henigsberg N, Mors O, et al. Self-report and clinician-rated measures of depression severity: can one replace the other? Depress Anxiety. 2012;29:1043–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Coons SJ, Kothari S, Monz BU, Burke LB. The Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Consortium: filling measurement gaps for PRO endpoints to support labeling claims. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011;90:743–8.CrossRefPubMed Coons SJ, Kothari S, Monz BU, Burke LB. The Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Consortium: filling measurement gaps for PRO endpoints to support labeling claims. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011;90:743–8.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Ball S, Dedios C, Abraham L. The patient’s perspective on major depressive disorder: what do we know? J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2012;15(Suppl 1):S1. Ball S, Dedios C, Abraham L. The patient’s perspective on major depressive disorder: what do we know? J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2012;15(Suppl 1):S1.
12.
go back to reference Blum SI, Bush EN, Bushnell DM. Systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures used to assess symptoms associated with major depressive disorder. J Ment Health Policy. 2012;15:S2–3. Blum SI, Bush EN, Bushnell DM. Systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures used to assess symptoms associated with major depressive disorder. J Ment Health Policy. 2012;15:S2–3.
13.
go back to reference American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th ed., text revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th ed., text revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.
15.
go back to reference Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, Leidy NK, Martin ML, Molsen E, et al. Content validity—establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1—eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value Health. 2011;14:967–77.CrossRefPubMed Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, Leidy NK, Martin ML, Molsen E, et al. Content validity—establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1—eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value Health. 2011;14:967–77.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Brod M, Tesler LE, Christensen TL. Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:1263–78.CrossRefPubMed Brod M, Tesler LE, Christensen TL. Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:1263–78.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, Leidy NK, Martin ML, Molsen E, et al. Content validity—establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 2—assessing respondent understanding. Value Health. 2011;14:978–88.CrossRefPubMed Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, Leidy NK, Martin ML, Molsen E, et al. Content validity—establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 2—assessing respondent understanding. Value Health. 2011;14:978–88.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Parker G, Roy K, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Wilhelm K, Mitchell P. The differential impact of age on the phenomenology of melancholia. Psychol Med. 2001;31(7):1231–6.CrossRefPubMed Parker G, Roy K, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Wilhelm K, Mitchell P. The differential impact of age on the phenomenology of melancholia. Psychol Med. 2001;31(7):1231–6.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Morriss R, Leese M, Chatwin J, Baldwin D, THREAD Study Group. Inter-rater reliability of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale as a diagnostic and outcome measure of depression in primary care. J Affect Disord. 2008;111(2–3):204–13.CrossRefPubMed Morriss R, Leese M, Chatwin J, Baldwin D, THREAD Study Group. Inter-rater reliability of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale as a diagnostic and outcome measure of depression in primary care. J Affect Disord. 2008;111(2–3):204–13.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Bech P, Fava M, Trivedi MH, Wisniewski SR, Rush AJ. Factor structure and dimensionality of the two depression scales in STAR*D using level 1 datasets. J Affect Disord. 2011;132(3):396–400.CrossRefPubMed Bech P, Fava M, Trivedi MH, Wisniewski SR, Rush AJ. Factor structure and dimensionality of the two depression scales in STAR*D using level 1 datasets. J Affect Disord. 2011;132(3):396–400.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Bagby RM, Ryder AG, Schuller DR, Marshall MB. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: has the gold standard become a lead weight? Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(12):2163–77.CrossRefPubMed Bagby RM, Ryder AG, Schuller DR, Marshall MB. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: has the gold standard become a lead weight? Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(12):2163–77.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Bech P, Allerup P, Gram LF, Reisby N, Rosenberg R, Jacobsen O, Nagy A. The Hamilton Depression Scale. Evaluation of objectivity using logistic models. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1981;63(3):290–9.CrossRefPubMed Bech P, Allerup P, Gram LF, Reisby N, Rosenberg R, Jacobsen O, Nagy A. The Hamilton Depression Scale. Evaluation of objectivity using logistic models. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1981;63(3):290–9.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Bech P, Wilson P, Wessel T, Lunde M, Fava M. A validation analysis of two self-reported HAM-D6 versions. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2009;119(4):298–303.CrossRefPubMed Bech P, Wilson P, Wessel T, Lunde M, Fava M. A validation analysis of two self-reported HAM-D6 versions. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2009;119(4):298–303.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Licht RW, Qvitzau S, Allerup P, Bech P. Validation of the Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale and the Hamilton Depression Scale in patients with major depression; is the total score a valid measure of illness severity? Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2005;111(2):144–9.CrossRefPubMed Licht RW, Qvitzau S, Allerup P, Bech P. Validation of the Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale and the Hamilton Depression Scale in patients with major depression; is the total score a valid measure of illness severity? Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2005;111(2):144–9.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Hickie I, Brodaty H, Boyce P, Mitchell P, Wilhelm K, et al. Inter-rater reliability of a refined index of melancholia: the CORE system. J Affect Disord. 1993;27(3):155–62.CrossRefPubMed Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Hickie I, Brodaty H, Boyce P, Mitchell P, Wilhelm K, et al. Inter-rater reliability of a refined index of melancholia: the CORE system. J Affect Disord. 1993;27(3):155–62.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Rush AJ, Trivedi MH, Ibrahim HM, Carmody TJ, Arnow B, Klein DN, et al. The 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS), clinician rating (QIDS-C), and self-report (QIDS-SR): a psychometric evaluation in patients with chronic major depression. Biol Psychiatry. 2003;54(5):573–83.CrossRefPubMed Rush AJ, Trivedi MH, Ibrahim HM, Carmody TJ, Arnow B, Klein DN, et al. The 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS), clinician rating (QIDS-C), and self-report (QIDS-SR): a psychometric evaluation in patients with chronic major depression. Biol Psychiatry. 2003;54(5):573–83.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Beck AT, Rush AJ, Shaw BF, Emery G. Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford; 1979. Beck AT, Rush AJ, Shaw BF, Emery G. Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford; 1979.
28.
go back to reference American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1980. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1980.
Metadata
Title
Patient-Centered Research to Support the Development of the Symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder Scale (SMDDS): Initial Qualitative Research
Authors
Kelly P. McCarrier
Linda S. Deal
Lucy Abraham
Steven I. Blum
Elizabeth Nicole Bush
Mona L. Martin
Michael E. Thase
Stephen Joel Coons
On behalf of the PRO Consortium’s Depression Working Group
Publication date
01-04-2016
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 2/2016
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-015-0132-1

Other articles of this Issue 2/2016

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 2/2016 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.