The ABC profile of the HAM-D17

Association between core-assigned melancholia and the melancholia subscale of the HAM-D

“…Later studies confirming the unidimensionality and clinical usefulness of this subscale suggested that the HAM-D6 is better suited to assess severity and response to treatment than the HAM-D (Bech et al, 1981;Licht et al, 2005) and indicated that the HAM-D6 has biological validity (Østergaard et al, 2014). Bech et al considered these six items (depressed mood, feelings of guilt, work and interests, psychomotor retardation, psychic anxiety, and tiredness/pain) as representing the nuclear symptoms of depression, while nine other items (HAM-D9: three insomnia items, agitation, somatic anxiety, loss of appetite, genital symptoms, hypochondriasis, and weight loss) evaluate unspecific arousal responses to stress; the remaining two items (HAM-D2) evaluate suicide thoughts and lack of insight (Bech, 2011).…”

The time has come to stop rotations for the identification of structures in the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D17)

“…These two items (HAM-D 2 ) contain the most idiographic HAM-D items. 7,8 With our analysis of the HAM-D 17 dataset from the study by Fleck et al, 10 we have shown that a varimax rotation did not improve the approximation of identifying a general factor covering general depressive disability and a bi-directional factor covering typical vs. atypical depression. This finding is in concordance with the PCA of the STAR*D dataset in which the same version of the HAM-D 17 was used.…”

“…6 In intelligence tests, the second principal component is expected to contrast verbal vs. non-verbal intelligence by a bi-directional factor (positive vs. negative loadings), whereas in the HAM-D 17 , it is expected to contrast typical vs. atypical depression. [6][7][8] However, the literature on the HAM-D 17 is very unclear on studies using factor analysis, because different authors have used different techniques within their exploratory factor analyses, i.e., different forms of rotation. 9 In the study by Fleck et al, 10 PCA identified a general factor in the HAM-D 17 .…”

“…Therefore, Fleck et al 10 then performed varimax rotation of the dataset in an attempt to identify other factors in an exploratory analysis in accordance with Kim & Mueller. 1 In this report, we will show the full outcome of PCA in the study by Fleck et al 10 as an example of using this method to test the hypothesis that the HAM-D 17 contains the general factor of depression disability as well as a second principal component separating the wings or subscale factors within the A,B,C version of HAM-D 17 , 7 in which (A) refers to HAM-D 6 (the core items of depression), (B) refers to the HAM-D 9 (the unspecific arousal symptoms of depression), and (C) refers to HAM-D 2 (suicidal thoughts and insight). These three subscales (A,B,C) have been selected on a purely clinical basis, not by factor analysis.…”

“…These three subscales (A,B,C) have been selected on a purely clinical basis, not by factor analysis. 7 …”