Validation studies of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale for the antenatal period

BackgroundRelatively few studies have focused on the validation of psychometric scales measuring depression during pregnancy. The aim of this review was to critically appraise and review antenatal validation studies of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS).MethodsA systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI, CINAHL, SCIELO and PsyCINFO for the period 1987–2013.ResultsEleven validation studies met the inclusion criteria. The study design varied between studies. Sensitivity and specificity estimates also varied between 64–100% and 73–100%, respectively. The confidence interval estimates also showed a high degree of variability. Our estimates suggest lower positive predictive values in the general population than those reported in the validation study samples. The sensitivity values in validation studies of the EPDS show fairly large variability, ranging from good to acceptable.LimitationsFuture studies should have larger sample sizes and include both representative and clinical samples and look at the psychometric performance of the EPDS in each trimester.ConclusionsDue to differences in study design and variation in the cultural/linguistic adaptation, uncertainty remains regarding the comparability of the sensitivity and specificity estimates of different EPDS versions. Future studies should have larger sample sizes, include both representative and clinical samples, and look at the psychometric performance of the EPDS in each trimester. Reporting quality, especially as regards checks to ensure content validity, should be improved.