Clinical Validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-6, and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-5: Results from the Clinical Research Center for Depression Study

Abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to validate the psychotic depression assessment scale (PDAS), which includes the six-item melancholia subscale from the Hamilton depression rating scale (HAMD-6) and the five-item psychosis subscale from the brief psychiatric rating scale (BPRS-5). Data from the Clinical Research Center for Depression (CRESCEND) study, which is a 52-week naturalistic trial, were analyzed.MethodsFifty-two patients with psychotic depression from the CRESCEND study met our inclusion criteria. The patients underwent the following psychometric assessments: the PDAS, including HAMD-6 and BPRS-5, the clinical global impression scales, the HAMD, the positive symptom subscale, and the negative symptom subscale. Assessments were performed at the baseline and then at weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52. Spearman correlation analyses were used to assess the clinical validity and responsiveness of the PDAS.ResultsThe clinical validity and responsiveness of the PDAS, including HAMD-6 and BPRS-5, were acceptable, with the exception of the clinical responsiveness of the PDAS for positive symptoms and the clinical responsiveness of BPRS-5 for negative symptoms.ConclusionThe clinical relevance of the PDAS has been confirmed and this clinical validation will enhance its clinical utility and availability.

Depression is associated with CD4 levels in people living with HIV in Ecuador

“…A CD4 test was performed at the national reference laboratory of the Ministry of Health. After signing the consent form, each one was evaluated using the Hamilton depression scale 9 , which consists of five categories: no symptoms of depression (<7 points), and then mild (8-13 points), moderate (14-18 points), serious (19-22 points), and very serious (> 23 points). The Spanish version of the Hamilton Depression Scale has been previously validated 10 .…”

Diagnostic Issues of Depressive Disorders from Kraepelinian Dualism to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition

“…Most of all, in an analysis of the data from the CRESCEND study, the BPRS subscale of the PDAS showed an effective screening ability to discriminate psychotic from nonpsychotic depression, with a cutoff score of one point (sensitivity=71.2%; specificity=87.2%). [76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84] The PDAS is thus the only useful validated scale to measure the overall aspects of psychotic depression and discriminate psychotic from nonpsychotic depression, even though it does not cover cognitive symptoms, formal thought disorders, or suicidal risk. Moreover, a more detailed version with an anchoring score from zero to four points for the PDAS has been developed, with the original English-language version now translated into Korean, Danish, Dutch, Japanese, and Turkish (http://psychoticdepressionassessmentscale.com).…”

A Machine-Learning-Algorithm-Based Prediction Model for Psychotic Symptoms in Patients with Depressive Disorder

“…The DSM-III and DSM-IV classify psychotic major depression as a subtype of severe depression or a severe variant of depression, according to the “severity psychosis” hypothesis that severe levels of depression are closely related to psychotic symptoms. However, in the DSM-5, with the rejection of the “severity psychosis” hypothesis, the specifier “with psychotic features” was added in connection with any level of depressive episodes, including dysthymia, mild and moderate depression, and severe depression [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ]. Østergaard et al [ 8 ] proposed that psychotic major depression can be defined as a distinctive diagnostic entity of “meta-syndrome,” including both unipolar and bipolar psychotic depression.…”