Jae Nam Bae1, Maeng Je Cho. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Inha University Hospital, Incheon, South Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic validity of the Korean version of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-K) and its short form among elderly psychiatric patients. METHOD: After three preliminary trials, the authors translated the GDS, including the Geriatric Depression Scale-Short Form (SGDS) into Korean. The GDS-K, the Korean version of the SGDS (SGDS-K), Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRS-D), and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) were administered to 154 elderly psychiatric patients. In addition, the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS-III-R) was administered independently to diagnose DSM-III-R major depression. Reliability and validity test, optimal cutoff point estimation, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis were performed to investigate the diagnostic validity of the GDS-K and SGDS-K. RESULTS: Internal consistency-reliability and concurrent validity of the GDS-K and SGDS-K associated with other depression scales (HRS-D, CES-D) were excellent. Content validity and discriminant validity, which differentiate DSM-III-R major depression from nonmajor depression was also good. We suggest a score of 16 as the optimal cutoff point of GDS-K for screening DSM-III-R major depression among clinical populations and a score of 8 as optimal cutoff score of SGDS-K. ROC curve analysis indicated high diagnostic validity for both GDS-K and SGDS-K in assessing DSM-III-R major depression. Moreover, we found that the GDS-K and SGDS-K were highly correlated (r=.9522). This finding suggests that the SGDS-K can be used as an adequate substitute for the GDS-K. CONCLUSION: The GDS-K and SGDS-K proved valid and reliable case-finding tools for screening DSM-III-R major depression among the elderly psychiatric patients in Korea. The relatively high cutoff points of both the GDS-K and SGDS-K require further evaluation from the viewpoint of culturally determined response style in elderly Koreans.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic validity of the Korean version of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-K) and its short form among elderly psychiatricpatients. METHOD: After three preliminary trials, the authors translated the GDS, including the Geriatric Depression Scale-Short Form (SGDS) into Korean. The GDS-K, the Korean version of the SGDS (SGDS-K), Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRS-D), and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) were administered to 154 elderly psychiatricpatients. In addition, the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS-III-R) was administered independently to diagnose DSM-III-R major depression. Reliability and validity test, optimal cutoff point estimation, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis were performed to investigate the diagnostic validity of the GDS-K and SGDS-K. RESULTS: Internal consistency-reliability and concurrent validity of the GDS-K and SGDS-K associated with other depression scales (HRS-D, CES-D) were excellent. Content validity and discriminant validity, which differentiate DSM-III-R major depression from nonmajor depression was also good. We suggest a score of 16 as the optimal cutoff point of GDS-K for screening DSM-III-R major depression among clinical populations and a score of 8 as optimal cutoff score of SGDS-K. ROC curve analysis indicated high diagnostic validity for both GDS-K and SGDS-K in assessing DSM-III-R major depression. Moreover, we found that the GDS-K and SGDS-K were highly correlated (r=.9522). This finding suggests that the SGDS-K can be used as an adequate substitute for the GDS-K. CONCLUSION: The GDS-K and SGDS-K proved valid and reliable case-finding tools for screening DSM-III-R major depression among the elderly psychiatricpatients in Korea. The relatively high cutoff points of both the GDS-K and SGDS-K require further evaluation from the viewpoint of culturally determined response style in elderly Koreans.
Authors: Seong Hye Choi; Sangyun Kim; Seol-Heui Han; Duk L Na; Doh-Kwan Kim; Hae-Kwan Cheong; Jae-Hong Lee; Seong Yoon Kim; Chang Hyung Hong; So Young Moon; Jay C Kwon; Jung Eun Kim; Jee H Jeong; Hae Ri Na; Kyung Ryeol Cha; Sang Won Seo; Yong S Shim; Jun-Young Lee; Kyung Won Park Journal: Neurol Sci Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 3.307
Authors: Jin Won Kim; Yu Jung Kim; Keun-Wook Lee; Hyun Chang; Jeong-Ok Lee; Kwang-Il Kim; Soo-Mee Bang; Jong Seok Lee; Cheol-Ho Kim; Jee Hyun Kim Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-11-28 Impact factor: 3.603