They are completely scripted, and evaluators cannot provide additional explanations or rephrase questions minimal judgment is involved. Fully structured interviews, in contrast, are designed for lay-interviewer administration to reduce the cost of clinician-administered interviews. The Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM (SCID) is the most commonly used semi-structured interview in depression research. Semi-structured interviews are designed for administration by trained professionals with diagnostic experience evaluators can interject queries and use their clinical judgment to determine whether symptoms are present and significant. There are important differences, however, in the designs of commonly used interviews. In mental health research, diagnostic interviews are used to classify disorders in a manner consistent with standard classification systems and replicable across studies. Interpretation of research that uses diagnostic interviews to classify depression should consider the interview characteristics. The odds of the depression classification with the CIDI increased less as symptom levels increased. Conclusions: Compared to the SCID, the MINI classified major depression more often. Classification odds for the CIDI (30 studies 21,703 participants) and the SCID did not differ overall (aOR 1.19 95% CI 0.79–1.75) however, as screening scores increased, the aOR increased less for the CIDI than the SCID (interaction aOR 0.64 95% CI 0.52–0.80). Controlling for symptom severity and participant characteristics, the MINI (74 studies 25,749 participants) classified major depression more often than the SCID (108 studies 21,953 participants aOR 1.46 95% confidence interval 1.11–1.92]). Results: In total, 69,405 participants (7,574 with major depression) from 212 studies were included. Next, we synthesized results using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis. For each IPDMA, separately, we fitted binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of major depression classification, controlling for symptom severity and characteristics of participants, and the interaction between interview and symptom severity. Methods: We included and standardized data from 3 IPDMA databases. Objective: To compare the odds of the major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI. However, there was an important lack of precision in the results. Introduction: Three previous individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) reported that, compared to the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM (SCID), alternative reference standards, primarily the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), tended to misclassify major depression status, when controlling for depression symptom severity.

What does the scid measure