Literature DB >> 8177918

Gender bias in the measurement properties of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D).

M Stommel1, B A Given, C W Given, H A Kalaian, R Schulz, R McCorkle.   

Abstract

Confirmatory factor-analytic models are used to examine gender biases of individual items of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale. In samples containing 708 cancer patients and 504 caregivers of the chronically ill elderly, two CES-D items are identified as producing biased responses in comparisons of male and female respondents. Three additional CES-D items are excluded on the basis of other psychometric problems, yielding a subset of 15 CES-D items that capture almost all the information of the original 20-item CES-D scale but are free of any gender bias. Gender differences in mean levels of depressive symptomatology are significantly reduced, but not eliminated, when the 15-item scale is used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8177918     DOI: 10.1016/0165-1781(93)90064-n

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychiatry Res        ISSN: 0165-1781            Impact factor:   3.222


  27 in total

1.  Assessment of differential item functioning for demographic comparisons in the MOS SF-36 health survey.

Authors:  Anthony J Perkins; Timothy E Stump; Patrick O Monahan; Colleen A McHorney
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Fatigue in women treated with bone marrow transplantation for breast cancer: a comparison with women with no history of cancer.

Authors:  D M Hann; P B Jacobsen; S C Martin; L E Kronish; L M Azzarello; K K Fields
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 3.  A review and recommendations for optimal outcome measures of anxiety, depression and general distress in studies evaluating psychosocial interventions for English-speaking adults with heterogeneous cancer diagnoses.

Authors:  Tim Luckett; Phyllis N Butow; Madeleine T King; Mayumi Oguchi; Gaynor Heading; Nadine A Hackl; Nicole Rankin; Melanie A Price
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-07-02       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Demographic characteristics do not decrease the utility of depressive symptoms assessments: examining the practical impact of item bias in four heterogeneous samples of older adults.

Authors:  Natalia O Dmitrieva; Denise Fyffe; Shubhabrata Mukherjee; Robert Fieo; Laura B Zahodne; Jamie Hamilton; Guy G Potter; Jennifer J Manly; Heather R Romero; Dan Mungas; Laura E Gibbons
Journal:  Int J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 3.485

5.  Screening for depression in arthritis populations: an assessment of differential item functioning in three self-reported questionnaires.

Authors:  Jinxiang Hu; Michael M Ward
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-06-17       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Disability and Activity-related Emotion in Later Life: Are Effects Buffered by Intimate Relationship Support and Strain?

Authors:  Deborah Carr; Jennifer C Cornman; Vicki A Freedman
Journal:  J Health Soc Behav       Date:  2017-07-03

7.  Unipolar depression in the Belgian population: trends and sex differences in an eight-wave sample.

Authors:  Naomi Wauterickx; Piet Bracke
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2005-09-05       Impact factor: 4.328

8.  Measurement differences in depression: chronic health-related and sociodemographic effects in older Americans.

Authors:  Frances M Yang; Richard N Jones
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2008-11-03       Impact factor: 4.312

9.  Disparities in self-reported geriatric depressive symptoms due to sociodemographic differences: an extension of the bi-factor item response theory model for use in differential item functioning.

Authors:  Frances M Yang; Doug Tommet; Richard N Jones
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2009-02-10       Impact factor: 4.791

10.  Improving quality of life in men with prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial of group education interventions.

Authors:  Stephen J Lepore; Vicki S Helgeson; David T Eton; Richard Schulz
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.267

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.