Literature DB >> 24262771

Standardization of depression measurement: a common metric was developed for 11 self-report depression measures.

Inka Wahl1, Bernd Löwe, Jakob Bue Bjorner, Felix Fischer, Gernot Langs, Ulrich Voderholzer, Stephen A Aita, Niels Bergemann, Elmar Brähler, Matthias Rose.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To provide a standardized metric for the assessment of depression severity to enable comparability among results of established depression measures. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: A common metric for 11 depression questionnaires was developed applying item response theory (IRT) methods. Data of 33,844 adults were used for secondary analysis including routine assessments of 23,817 in- and outpatients with mental and/or medical conditions (46% with depressive disorders) and a general population sample of 10,027 randomly selected participants from three representative German household surveys.
RESULTS: A standardized metric for depression severity was defined by 143 items, and scores were normed to a general population mean of 50 (standard deviation = 10) for easy interpretability. It covers the entire range of depression severity assessed by established instruments. The metric allows comparisons among included measures. Large differences were found in their measurement precision and range, providing a rationale for instrument selection. Published scale-specific threshold scores of depression severity showed remarkable consistencies across different questionnaires.
CONCLUSION: An IRT-based instrument-independent metric for depression severity enables direct comparisons among established measures. The "common ruler" simplifies the interpretation of depression assessment by identifying key thresholds for clinical and epidemiologic decision making and facilitates integrative psychometric research across studies, including meta-analysis.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Depression; Health outcome assessment; Item bank; Item response theory; Linking; Patient-reported outcomes

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24262771     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.04.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  51 in total

1.  PHQ-9: global uptake of a depression scale.

Authors:  Kurt Kroenke
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 49.548

2.  Language-related differential item functioning between English and German PROMIS Depression items is negligible.

Authors:  H Felix Fischer; Inka Wahl; Sandra Nolte; Gregor Liegl; Elmar Brähler; Bernd Löwe; Matthias Rose
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2016-10-16       Impact factor: 4.035

3.  Screening for mental disorders in heart failure patients using computer-adaptive tests.

Authors:  H Felix Fischer; Cassandra Klug; Koosje Roeper; Eva Blozik; Frank Edelmann; Marion Eisele; Stefan Störk; Rolf Wachter; Martin Scherer; Matthias Rose; Christoph Herrmann-Lingen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-12-14       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Measurement invariance and general population reference values of the PROMIS Profile 29 in the UK, France, and Germany.

Authors:  Felix Fischer; Chris Gibbons; Joël Coste; Jose M Valderas; Matthias Rose; Alain Leplège
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Expanding a common metric for depression reporting: linking two scales to PROMIS® depression.

Authors:  Aaron J Kaat; Michael E Newcomb; Daniel T Ryan; Brian Mustanski
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2016-11-04       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Linkage between the PROMIS® pediatric and adult emotional distress measures.

Authors:  Bryce B Reeve; David Thissen; Darren A DeWalt; I-Chan Huang; Yang Liu; Brooke Magnus; Hally Quinn; Heather E Gross; Pamela A Kisala; Pengsheng Ni; Stephen Haley; M J Mulcahey; Susie Charlifue; Robin A Hanks; Mary Slavin; Alan Jette; David S Tulsky
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Minimally important differences and severity thresholds are estimated for the PROMIS depression scales from three randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Kurt Kroenke; Timothy E Stump; Chen X Chen; Jacob Kean; Matthew J Bair; Teresa M Damush; Erin E Krebs; Patrick O Monahan
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 4.839

8.  Operating characteristics of PROMIS four-item depression and anxiety scales in primary care patients with chronic pain.

Authors:  Kurt Kroenke; Zhangsheng Yu; Jingwei Wu; Jacob Kean; Patrick O Monahan
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 3.750

9.  Methylation of the FKBP5 gene in association with FKBP5 genotypes, childhood maltreatment and depression.

Authors:  Johanna Klinger-König; Johannes Hertel; Sandra Van der Auwera; Stefan Frenzel; Liliane Pfeiffer; Melanie Waldenberger; Janine Golchert; Alexander Teumer; Matthias Nauck; Georg Homuth; Henry Völzke; Hans J Grabe
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 7.853

10.  Application of Latent Variable Methods to the Study of Cognitive Decline When Tests Change over Time.

Authors:  Alden L Gross; Melinda C Power; Marilyn S Albert; Jennifer A Deal; Rebecca F Gottesman; Michael Griswold; Lisa M Wruck; Thomas H Mosley; Josef Coresh; A Richey Sharrett; Karen Bandeen-Roche
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.