P Mottram1, K Wilson, J Copeland. 1. EMI Academic Unit, Department of Psychiatry, St Catherine's Hospital, Church Road, Birkenhead, Merseyside CH42, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To validate the Hamilton Depression (17) and Montgommery and Asberg Depression Scales as research instruments in older depressed community residents. DESIGN: External validation against GMS/AGECAT case level in the recruitment of older community residents for an antidepressant trial. ANALYSES: Receiver operator curves were generated for each rating scale, using GMS/AGECAT case level in external criterion. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of both rating instruments were examined in the whole sample and age and gender subgroups. MADRS and HAM-D cut-off scores differentiating GMS/AGECAT cases from subcases were identified. RESULTS: HAM-D cut-off score of 16 and MADRS score of 21 were identified as differentiating case from sub-case. Diagnostic accuracy of both instruments was good, reflecting good sensitivity and specificity across both genders and sub-age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both scales performed well in this population. These scores provide researchers with externally validated and clinically relevant cut-off scores in designing trials in the management of older depressed community residents. Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
OBJECTIVE: To validate the Hamilton Depression (17) and Montgommery and Asberg Depression Scales as research instruments in older depressed community residents. DESIGN: External validation against GMS/AGECAT case level in the recruitment of older community residents for an antidepressant trial. ANALYSES: Receiver operator curves were generated for each rating scale, using GMS/AGECAT case level in external criterion. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of both rating instruments were examined in the whole sample and age and gender subgroups. MADRS and HAM-D cut-off scores differentiating GMS/AGECAT cases from subcases were identified. RESULTS: HAM-D cut-off score of 16 and MADRS score of 21 were identified as differentiating case from sub-case. Diagnostic accuracy of both instruments was good, reflecting good sensitivity and specificity across both genders and sub-age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both scales performed well in this population. These scores provide researchers with externally validated and clinically relevant cut-off scores in designing trials in the management of older depressed community residents. Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors: Kjell Lindström; Anders Ekedahl; Anders Carlsten; Jan Mårtensson; Sigvard Mölstad Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 2.581
Authors: Natalia O Dmitrieva; Denise Fyffe; Shubhabrata Mukherjee; Robert Fieo; Laura B Zahodne; Jamie Hamilton; Guy G Potter; Jennifer J Manly; Heather R Romero; Dan Mungas; Laura E Gibbons Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2014-04-15 Impact factor: 3.485
Authors: Laura R Stroud; George D Papandonatos; Meaghan McCallum; Tessa Kehoe; Amy L Salisbury; Marilyn A Huestis Journal: Neurotoxicol Teratol Date: 2018-09-26 Impact factor: 3.763
Authors: Robert Fieo; Shubhabrata Mukherjee; Natalia O Dmitrieva; Denise C Fyffe; Alden L Gross; Elizabeth R Sanders; Heather R Romero; Guy G Potter; Jennifer J Manly; Dan M Mungas; Laura E Gibbons Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 3.485
Authors: Johanna Ulfvarson; Johanna Adami; Regina Wredling; Bengt Kjellman; Marie Reilly; Christer von Bahr Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2003-11-01 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Veit Mylius; Daniel Ciampi de Andrade; Rubens Gisbert Cury; Michael Teepker; Uwe Ehrt; Karla Maria Eggert; Serafin Beer; Jürg Kesselring; Maria Stamelou; Wolfgang H Oertel; Jens Carsten Möller; Jean-Pascal Lefaucheur Journal: Mov Disord Clin Pract Date: 2015-08-09