Measuring depression: comparison and integration of three scales in the GENDEP study
- 9 October 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Psychological Medicine
- Vol. 38 (2), 289-300
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291707001730
Abstract
A number of scales are used to estimate the severity of depression. However, differences between self-report and clinician rating, multi-dimensionality and different weighting of individual symptoms in summed scores may affect the validity of measurement. In this study we examined and integrated the psychometric properties of three commonly used rating scales. The 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17), the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) were administered to 660 adult patients with unipolar depression in a multi-centre pharmacogenetic study. Item response theory (IRT) and factor analysis were used to evaluate their psychometric properties and estimate true depression severity, as well as to group items and derive factor scores. The MADRS and the BDI provide internally consistent but mutually distinct estimates of depression severity. The HAMD-17 is not internally consistent and contains several items less suitable for out-patients. Factor analyses indicated a dominant depression factor. A model comprising three dimensions, namely ‘observed mood and anxiety’, ‘cognitive’ and ‘neurovegetative’, provided a more detailed description of depression severity. The MADRS and the BDI can be recommended as complementary measures of depression severity. The three factor scores are proposed for external validation.Keywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Montgomery Äsberg and the Hamilton ratings of depression: A comparison of measuresEuropean Neuropsychopharmacology, 2006
- Meta-analysis of the factor structures of four depression questionnaires: Beck, CES-D, Hamilton, and ZungJournal of Clinical Psychology, 2005
- The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: Has the Gold Standard Become a Lead Weight?American Journal of Psychiatry, 2004
- An Empirical Evaluation of Alternative Methods of Estimation for Confirmatory Factor Analysis With Ordinal Data.Psychological Methods, 2004
- The validity of diagnostic systems for common mental disorders: a comparison between the ID-CATEGO and the DSM-III systemsPsychological Medicine, 1990
- Item characteristics of the hamilton rating scale for depressionJournal of Psychiatric Research, 1985
- A meta‐analytic comparison of the Beck Depression Inventory and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression as measures of treatment outcomeBritish Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1984
- The Carroll Rating Scale for Depression III. Comparison with Other Rating InstrumentsThe British Journal of Psychiatry, 1981
- A New Depression Scale Designed to be Sensitive to ChangeThe British Journal of Psychiatry, 1979
- A RATING SCALE FOR DEPRESSIONJournal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 1960