Assessment of depression: A comparison of rating scales

Faravelli, Carlo; Albanesi, G; Poli, Enrico

doi:10.1016/0165-0327(86)90076-5

Cited by 92 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…139 Content and criterion validity are good, as it includes most of the DSM-IV criteria for major depression, 140 and concurrent validity is acceptable. 38,141,142 There are a large number of somatic items. To adjust for an expected higher baseline score in elderly patients seen in medical settings, it has been recommended that the cutoff score be raised from 50 in the general population to 60 or greater in this population.…”

Section: Zung Self-rating Depression Scale (Sds) Depression In Non-pdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Depression rating scales in Parkinson's disease: Critique and recommendations

Schrag¹,

Barone²,

Brown³

et al. 2007

Movement Disorders

585

348

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Depression is a common comorbid condition in Parkinson's disease (PD) and a major contributor to poor quality of life and disability. However, depression can be difficult to assess in patients with PD due to overlapping symptoms and difficulties in the assessment of depression in cognitively impaired patients. As several rating scales have been used to assess depression in PD (dPD), the Movement Disorder Society commissioned a task force to assess their clinimetric properties and make clinical recommendations regarding their use. A systematic literature review was conducted to explore the use of depression scales in PD and determine which scales should be selected for this review. The scales reviewed were the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Hamilton Depression Scale (Ham-D), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Part I, Cornell Scale for the Assessment of Depression in Dementia (CSDD), and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Seven clinical researchers with clinical and research experience in the assessment of dPD were assigned to review the scales using a structured format. The most appropriate scale is dependent on the clinical or research goal. However, observer-rated scales are preferred if the study or clinical situation permits. For screening purposes, the HAM-D, BDI, HADS, MADRS, and GDS are valid in dPD. The CES-D and CSDD are alternative instruments that need validation in dPD. For measurement of severity of depressive symptoms, the Ham-D, MADRS, BDI, and SDS scales are recommended. Further studies are needed to validate the CSDD, which could be particularly useful for the assessment of severity of dPD in patients with comorbid dementia. To account for overlapping motor and nonmotor symptoms of depression, adjusted instrument cutoff scores may be needed for dPD, and scales to assess severity of motor symptoms (e.g., UPDRS) should also be included to help adjust for confounding factors. The HADS and the GDS include limited motor symptom assessment and may, therefore, be most useful in rating depression severity across a range of PD severity; however, these scales appear insensitive in severe depression. The complex and time-consuming task of developing a new scale to measure depression specifically for patients with PD is currently not warranted.

show abstract

Section: Zung Self-rating Depression Scale (Sds) Depression In Non-pdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Depression rating scales in Parkinson's disease: Critique and recommendations

Schrag¹,

Barone²,

Brown³

et al. 2007

Movement Disorders

585

348

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These examinations were performed at 24 hours after dialysis. Depression and anxiety were also measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (i.e., self-rating anxiety and depression scales: the Zung Self-Rating Anxiety Scale [SAS] and the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale) (21,22). NCT-A assesses the domain of psychomotor speed.…”

Section: Neuropsychological Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-Establishing Brain Networks in Patients with ESRD after Successful Kidney Transplantation

Chen¹,

Wen

Qi³

et al. 2017

CJASN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objectives Cognition in ESRD may be improved by kidney transplantation, but mechanisms are unclear. We explored patterns of resting-state networks with resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging among patients with ESRD before and after kidney transplantation.Design, setting, participants, & measurements Thirty-seven patients with ESRD scheduled for kidney transplantation and 22 age-, sex-, and education-matched healthy subjects underwent resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. Patients were imaged before and 1 and 6 months after kidney transplantation. Functional connectivity of seven resting-state subnetworks was evaluated: default mode network, dorsal attention network, central executive network, self-referential network, sensorimotor network, visual network, and auditory network. Mixed effects models tested associations of ESRD, kidney transplantation, and neuropsychological measurements with functional connectivity.Results Compared with controls, pretransplant patients showed abnormal functional connectivity in six subnetworks. Compared with pretransplant patients, increased functional connectivity was observed in the default mode network, the dorsal attention network, the central executive network, the sensorimotor network, the auditory network, and the visual network 1 and 6 months after kidney transplantation (P=0.01). Six months after kidney transplantation, no significant difference in functional connectivity was observed for the dorsal attention network, the central executive network, the auditory network, or the visual network between patients and controls. Default mode network and sensorimotor network remained significantly different from those in controls when assessed 6 months after kidney transplantation. A relationship between functional connectivity and neuropsychological measurements was found in specific brain regions of some brain networks. ConclusionsThe recovery patterns of resting-state subnetworks vary after kidney transplantation. The dorsal attention network, the central executive network, the auditory network, and the visual network recovered to normal levels, whereas the default mode network and the sensorimotor network did not recover completely 6 months after kidney transplantation. Neural resting-state functional connectivity was lower among patients with ESRD compared with control subjects, but it significantly improved with kidney transplantation. Resting-state subnetworks exhibited variable recovery, in some cases to levels that were no longer significantly different from those of normal controls.

show abstract

“…Since this is realistically possible in the real world, remaining with half the symptoms actually reflects 'poor response', as it is at least disappointing for the patient. Moreover, in a scale like the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, where the core symptoms represent only a fraction of the total score [2], the reduction in the final score may be due to the improvement/disappearance of the typical depressive signs (e.g. mood, anhedonia, guilt, suicidal ideation, psychic signs and retardation), which is a good point on clinical grounds, or to the amelioration of accessory symptoms (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%