Race/ethnicity and the factor structure of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale: A meta-analysis.

Abstract

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine racial/ethnic differences in the factor structure of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). The total number of participants (N) in the assessed studies (k) varied according to whether the original study had used either Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA; N = 19,206, k = 13) or Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA; N = 65,554, k = 16). The factor structures of the CES-D were compared across five racial/ethnic groups: African Americans, American Indians, Asians, Whites, and Hispanics. Meta-analysis results suggest that the structure of the CES-D observed in EFAs varied substantially between racial/ethnic groups, whereas the CFA-assessed structure of the CES-D was mostly consistent between racial/ethnic groups. The meta-analysis of EFA studies did not consistently replicate the original four-factor structure reported by Radloff (1977), but the meta-analysis of CFA studies replicated the original four-factor structure in four of the five racial/ethnic groups. Overall, the present meta-analysis found strong evidence that the original four-factor structure may not be the best fit for all racial/ethnic groups. Thus, in clinical settings where the CES-D is used as a tool to screen for depression, clinicians and researchers should recognize the risk that symptoms of depression may be presented differently by members of different racial/ethnic groups.

Gradients in Depressive Symptoms by Socioeconomic Position Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in the EXPLORE Study

“…The use of the short version of the CESD has been previously validated by (Ross & Mirowsky, 2006). The validity of alternative versions of the CESD-SF has been documented in other studies (Andresen, Malmgren, Carter, & Patrick, 1994; Chang & Weng, 2013; Kohout, Berkman, Evans, & Cornoni-Huntley, 1993; Levine, 2013), including in studies with MSM (Salomon et al, 2009), and vulnerable and minority groups (Burton, Marshal, Chisolm, Sucato, & Friedman, 2013; Callahan & Wolinsky, 1994; Kim, Decoster, Huang, & Chiriboga, 2011; Perreira, Deeb-Sossa, Harris, & Bollen, 2005). …”

Impact of coping with interpersonal stress on the risk of depression in a Japanese sample: a focus on reassessing coping

“…For example, Iwata and Buka’s study (2002), which is frequently cited by researchers as representative of CES-D scores in Japanese college students included only 310 participants. The CES-D has been widely used in many countries and with many racial/ethnic groups (Kim et al 2011)—indeed, the article reporting on the development of the CES-D (Radloff 1977) was listed as 51st (with 17,055 citations) out of 100 in a list of the most-cited papers of all time by Nature (van Noorden et al 2014) in 2014. This suggests that our data on the CES-D would be particularly useful for behavioral medicine research.…”

Work and Health Among Latina Mothers in Farmworker Families

“…40 This 10-item version of the scale delineates the frequency and severity of current depressive symptoms. 41 Items were scored in a 4-point scale and summed. Possible scores range from 0 to 30 (α=0.84); greater scores reflect higher levels of depressive symptoms.…”