| Literature DB >> 21143972 |
Ahmed K Ibrahim1, Shona J Kelly, Emily C Challenor, Cris Glazebrook.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is thought that depressive disorders will be the second leading cause of disability worldwide by 2020. Recently, there is a steady increase in the number of university students diagnosed and treated as depression patients. It can be assumed that depression is a serious mental health problem for university students because it affects all age groups of the students either younger or older equally. The current study aims to establish the reliability and validity of the Zagazig Depression scale in a UK sample.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 21143972 PMCID: PMC3003634 DOI: 10.1186/1471-244X-10-107
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Psychiatry ISSN: 1471-244X Impact factor: 3.630
Figure 1Selection and exclusion of participants.
Zagazig and PHQ severity by gender
| Male (N = 42) | Female (N = 57) | Total (N = 99) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| None (< 10) | 34 (81.0%) | 35 (61.4%) | 69 (69.7%) | |
| Mild (10-19) | 6 (14.2%) | 18 (31.6%) | 25 (25.3%) | |
| Moderate (20-29) | 1 (2.4%) | 4 (7.0%) | 4 (4%) | |
| Severe (≥30) | 1 (2.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (1%) | |
| None (< 5) | 33 (78.6%) | 29 (50.9%) | 62 (62.6%) | |
| Mild (5-9) | 5(11.9%) | 20 (35.1%) | 25 (25.3%) | |
| Moderate (10-14) | 3 (7.1%) | 7 (12.3%) | 10 (10.1%) | |
| Moderate to severe (15-19) | 0(0.0%) | 1 (1.8%) | 1 (1%) | |
| Severe (≥20) | 1 (2.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (1%) | |
Figure 2Histogram for Zagazig score.
Cronbach's alpha for depression domains of ZDS
| Domain | Cronbach's Alpha* | N of Items |
|---|---|---|
| .596 | 4 | |
| .532 | 4 | |
| .817 | 2 | |
| .758 | 5 | |
| .618 | 4 | |
| .531 | 4 | |
| .709 | 9 | |
| .370 | 4 | |
| .562 | 8 | |
| .471 | 2 | |
*Based on Standardized Items
ZDS vs. PHQ cross tabulation
| PHQ | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Not depressed | Depressed | |||
| 60 (60.4%) | 9 (8.9%) | 69 (69.3%) | ||
| 2 (2%) | 28 (28.7%) | 30 (30.7%) | ||
| 62 (62.4%) | 37 (37.6%) | 99 (100%) | ||
Grades of severity of depression in ZDS vs. PHQ cross tabulation
| PHQ | Total | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Mild | Moderate | Severe | |||
| 60 (60.4%) | 8 (7.9%) | 1 (1%) | 0 (0%) | 69 (69.3%) | ||
| 2 (2%) | 17 (17.8%) | 5 (5%) | 0 (0%) | 24 (24.8%) | ||
| 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (3.9%) | 1 (1%) | 5 (4.9%) | ||
| 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (1%) | 1 (1%) | ||
| 62 (62.4%) | 25 (25.7%) | 10 (9.9%) | 2 (2%) | 99 (100%) | ||
Spearman's correlation between Zagazig, SES and Control scores
| Number (N = 99) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.000 | |||||
| .102** (> 0.01) | 1.000 | ||||
| -.142**(> 0.01) | -.092**(> 0.01) | 1.000 | |||
| -.206*(< 0.05) | -.022**(> 0.01) | .170**(> 0.01) | 1.000 | ||
| -.119**(> 0.01) | -.188**(> 0.01) | .142**(> 0.01) | .070**(> 0.01) | 1.000 | |
| -.573**(< 0.01) | -.151**(> 0.01) | -.153*(> 0.05) | .152**(> 0.01) | .010**(> 0.01) | |
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).