BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to define treatment response and remission cut-point scores for the Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition (BDI-II) when used to monitor seasonal affective disorder (SAD) treatment. METHODS: Data from two published randomized clinical trials for SAD were utilized to complete a ROC analysis to define response and remission thresholds for the BDI-II. The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-Seasonal Affective Disorder Version (SIGH-SAD) was used as a reference standard. Data from the two trials included BDI-II and SIGH-SAD scores for patients at baseline, 6 weeks (post-treatment), and 1 year (next winter). RESULTS: BDI-II score of ≤ 9 was the derived criterion for remission of SAD, and BDI-II score decrease of 50% from baseline was the criterion for treatment response. LIMITATIONS: Study participants were primarily female (94%) and Caucasian (80%) so demographic diversity of the sample was limited. CONCLUSION: This study validated BDI-II scores compared to the SIGH-SAD reference standard. The BDI-II has greater potential for widespread use by clinicians than the SIGH-SAD to monitor SAD patients because it is a brief self-report instrument that can be conveniently administered in the waiting room. Copyright Â
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to define treatment response and remission cut-point scores for the Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition (BDI-II) when used to monitor seasonal affective disorder (SAD) treatment. METHODS: Data from two published randomized clinical trials for SAD were utilized to complete a ROC analysis to define response and remission thresholds for the BDI-II. The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-Seasonal Affective Disorder Version (SIGH-SAD) was used as a reference standard. Data from the two trials included BDI-II and SIGH-SAD scores for patients at baseline, 6 weeks (post-treatment), and 1 year (next winter). RESULTS: BDI-II score of ≤ 9 was the derived criterion for remission of SAD, and BDI-II score decrease of 50% from baseline was the criterion for treatment response. LIMITATIONS: Study participants were primarily female (94%) and Caucasian (80%) so demographic diversity of the sample was limited. CONCLUSION: This study validated BDI-II scores compared to the SIGH-SAD reference standard. The BDI-II has greater potential for widespread use by clinicians than the SIGH-SAD to monitor SADpatients because it is a brief self-report instrument that can be conveniently administered in the waiting room. Copyright Â
Authors: Madhukar H Trivedi; A John Rush; Stephen R Wisniewski; Andrew A Nierenberg; Diane Warden; Louise Ritz; Grayson Norquist; Robert H Howland; Barry Lebowitz; Patrick J McGrath; Kathy Shores-Wilson; Melanie M Biggs; G K Balasubramani; Maurizio Fava Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: A John Rush; Helena C Kraemer; Harold A Sackeim; Maurizio Fava; Madhukar H Trivedi; Ellen Frank; Philip T Ninan; Michael E Thase; Alan J Gelenberg; David J Kupfer; Darrel A Regier; Jerrold F Rosenbaum; Oakley Ray; Alan F Schatzberg Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2006-06-21 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: L L Judd; M J Paulus; P J Schettler; H S Akiskal; J Endicott; A C Leon; J D Maser; T Mueller; D A Solomon; M B Keller Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: N E Rosenthal; D A Sack; J C Gillin; A J Lewy; F K Goodwin; Y Davenport; P S Mueller; D A Newsome; T A Wehr Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 1984-01
Authors: Sudha Prathikanti; Renee Rivera; Ashly Cochran; Jose Gabriel Tungol; Nima Fayazmanesh; Eva Weinmann Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-03-16 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Stephen Ross; Anthony Bossis; Jeffrey Guss; Gabrielle Agin-Liebes; Tara Malone; Barry Cohen; Sarah E Mennenga; Alexander Belser; Krystallia Kalliontzi; James Babb; Zhe Su; Patricia Corby; Brian L Schmidt Journal: J Psychopharmacol Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 4.153