Author:
Seemüller Florian,Schennach Rebecca,Musil Richard,Obermeier Michael,Adli Mazda,Bauer Michael,Brieger Peter,Laux Gerd,Gaebel Wolfgang,Falkai Peter,Riedel Michael,Möller Hans-Jürgen
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Quantifying depression mainly relies on the use of depression scales, and understanding their factor structure is crucial for evaluating their validity.
Methods
This post-hoc analysis utilized prospectively collected data from a naturalistic study of 1014 inpatients with major depression. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were performed to test the psychometric abilities of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale, and the self-rated Beck Depression Inventory. A combined factor analysis was also conducted including all items of all scales.
Results
All three scales showed good to very good internal consistency. The HAMD-17 had four factors: an "anxiety" factor, a "depression" factor, an "insomnia" factor, and a "somatic" factor. The MADRS also had four factors: a “sadness” factor, a neurovegetative factor, a “detachment” factor and a “negative thoughts” factor, while the BDI had three factors: a "negative attitude towards self" factor, a "performance impairment" factor, and a "somatic" factor. The combined factor analysis suggested that self-ratings might reflect a distinct illness dimension within major depression.
Conclusions
The factors obtained in this study are comparable to those found in previous research. Self and clinician ratings are complementary and not redundant, highlighting the importance of using multiple measures to quantify depression.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献