Ching-I Hung1, Shuu-Jiun Wang, Chia-Yih Liu. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Chang-Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang-Gung University School of Medicine, 5 Fu-Shing Street, Kweishan,Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Depression and Somatic Symptoms Scale (DSSS) is a self-administered scale developed for monitoring both depression and somatic symptoms. The aims of this study were to establish the criterion-related validity of the DSSS by testing the correlation between the DSSS and the Short Form 36 (SF-36) scale and to compare the ability of the DSSS and two other scales in predicting the outcome of the SF-36. METHODS: The study enrolled 135 outpatients with a major depressive episode, 95 of whom received treatment for 1 month. Four scales were administered and evaluated: the DSSS, the SF-36, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Pearson correlation was used to test correlations among scales. Multiple linear regressions were used to find the scales most effective in predicting the SF-36. RESULTS: The three scales were significantly correlated with most of the SF-36 subscales. The depression and somatic subscales of the DSSS significantly correlated with the mental and physical subscales of the SF-36, respectively. The DSSS and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were better able to predict physical and mental subscales of the SF-36, respectively. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale had a good ability to predict functional impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric scales with appropriate somatic symptoms might be more compatible with both physical and mental dimensions of the SF-36. DSSS proved to be a valid scale for monitoring both depression and somatic symptoms in patients with depression. Future studies should test whether the DSSS is better at predicting the treatment and prognosis of depression than conventional scales for depression. (c) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
BACKGROUND: The Depression and Somatic Symptoms Scale (DSSS) is a self-administered scale developed for monitoring both depression and somatic symptoms. The aims of this study were to establish the criterion-related validity of the DSSS by testing the correlation between the DSSS and the Short Form 36 (SF-36) scale and to compare the ability of the DSSS and two other scales in predicting the outcome of the SF-36. METHODS: The study enrolled 135 outpatients with a major depressive episode, 95 of whom received treatment for 1 month. Four scales were administered and evaluated: the DSSS, the SF-36, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Pearson correlation was used to test correlations among scales. Multiple linear regressions were used to find the scales most effective in predicting the SF-36. RESULTS: The three scales were significantly correlated with most of the SF-36 subscales. The depression and somatic subscales of the DSSS significantly correlated with the mental and physical subscales of the SF-36, respectively. The DSSS and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were better able to predict physical and mental subscales of the SF-36, respectively. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale had a good ability to predict functional impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric scales with appropriate somatic symptoms might be more compatible with both physical and mental dimensions of the SF-36. DSSS proved to be a valid scale for monitoring both depression and somatic symptoms in patients with depression. Future studies should test whether the DSSS is better at predicting the treatment and prognosis of depression than conventional scales for depression. (c) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Jong-Min Woo; Hong Jin Jeon; Hyo-Jin Kim; Kwang-Hun Lee; Chang Uk Lee; Jai Sung Noh; Chang Hwa Lee; Jin Pyo Hong Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst Date: 2014-11-15
Authors: Jong-Min Woo; Hong Jin Jeon; Eunsun Noh; Hyo-Jin Kim; Sun Woo Lee; Kyung Kyu Lee; Sung Hwan Kim; Jin Pyo Hong Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Hong Jin Jeon; Jong-Min Woo; Hyo-Jin Kim; Maurizio Fava; David Mischoulon; Seong Jin Cho; Sung Man Chang; Doo-Heum Park; Jong Woo Kim; Ikki Yoo; Jung-Yoon Heo; Jin Pyo Hong Journal: Psychiatry Investig Date: 2016-11-24 Impact factor: 2.505
Authors: Vega González-Bueso; Juan José Santamaría; Daniel Fernández; Laura Merino; Elena Montero; Joan Ribas Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-04-03 Impact factor: 3.390