Fountoulakis Konstantinos N, Bech Per, Panagiotidis Panagiotis, Siamouli Melina, Kantartzis Sotiris, Papadopoulou Anna, Papadopoulou Marina, Kaprinis Stergios, Kourila Eleftheria, Iacovides Apostolos, St Kaprinis George
Laboratory of Psychophysiology, 3rd Department of Psychiatry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece.
J Affect Disord. 2007 Jan;97(1-3):187-95. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2006.06.015. Epub 2006 Jul 17.
Although a great number of depressive scales were developed during the last decades, there are only a few studies that compare them in terms of reliability and validity. The current study aimed to compare the properties of some of the most popular of these scales.
The study sample included 40 depressed patients 29.65+/-9.38 years old, and 120 normal comparison subjects 27.23+/-10.62 years old. The clinical diagnosis was reached by consensus of two examiners with the use of the SCAN v.2.0. The scales compared were the CES-D, ZDRS, BDI-I, and the KSQ. The STAI, the Life Change Scale (Holms and Rahe), and the EPQ were also administered. The analysis included the comparison of psychometric properties and the use of Pearson correlation coefficient and factor analysis.
The results suggested that no scale was clearly superior to the others. All scales correlated to anxiety measurements, sociodemographic variables, personality dimensions and non-specific indices. The results reported here include an appendix with algorithms that help transforming one scale score into other scales scores. These algorithms can be useful for comparison purposes in meta-analytic studies.
The comparison of several depressive scales provided no impressive results on the superiority or inferiority of a specific scale in comparison to the others.
尽管在过去几十年间开发了大量抑郁量表,但仅有少数研究对它们的信度和效度进行比较。本研究旨在比较其中一些最常用量表的特性。
研究样本包括40名年龄为29.65±9.38岁的抑郁症患者和120名年龄为27.23±10.62岁的正常对照者。由两名检查者使用SCAN v.2.0达成临床诊断共识。所比较的量表有流调中心抑郁量表(CES-D)、Zung抑郁自评量表(ZDRS)、贝克抑郁问卷第一版(BDI-I)和Kaufman自评抑郁量表(KSQ)。还施测了状态-特质焦虑量表(STAI)、生活变化量表(霍尔姆斯和拉赫编制)和艾森克人格问卷(EPQ)。分析包括心理测量特性的比较以及使用皮尔逊相关系数和因子分析。
结果表明没有一个量表明显优于其他量表。所有量表均与焦虑测量、社会人口统计学变量、人格维度和非特异性指标相关。此处报告的结果包括一个附录,其中有帮助将一个量表分数转换为其他量表分数的算法。这些算法在荟萃分析研究的比较中可能有用。
几种抑郁量表的比较并未得出某一特定量表比其他量表更具优越性或劣势的显著结果。