Department of Psychiatry, and The Center for the Study of Aging, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2010 Sep;122(3):226-34. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2009.01531.x. Epub 2010 Jan 19.
To evaluate psychometric properties and comparability ability of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) vs. the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-rated (QIDS-C(16)) and Self-report (QIDS-SR(16)) scales to detect a current major depressive episode in the elderly.
Community and clinic subjects (age >or=60 years) were administered the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) for DSM-IV and three depression scales randomly. Statistics included classical test and Samejima item response theories, factor analyzes, and receiver operating characteristic methods.
In 229 elderly patients (mean age = 73 years, 39% male, 54% current depression), all three scales were unidimensional and with nearly equal Cronbach alpha reliability (0.85-0.89). Each scale discriminated persons with major depression from the non-depressed, but the QIDS-C(16) was slightly more accurate.
All three tests are valid for detecting geriatric major depression with the QIDS-C(16) being slightly better. Self-rated QIDS-SR(16) is recommended as a screening tool as it is least expensive and least time consuming.
评估蒙哥马利-阿斯伯格抑郁评定量表(MADRS)与快速抑郁症状清单临床评定量表(QIDS-C(16))和自报量表(QIDS-SR(16))相比,在检测老年人当前重度抑郁发作时的心理测量特性和可比性。
对社区和诊所的受试者(年龄≥60 岁)进行 DSM-IV 迷你国际神经精神访谈(MINI)和三种抑郁量表的随机评估。统计学方法包括经典测试和Samejima 项目反应理论、因子分析和受试者工作特征方法。
在 229 名老年患者(平均年龄 73 岁,39%为男性,54%为当前抑郁)中,所有三种量表均为单维度,且具有几乎相同的 Cronbach alpha 可靠性(0.85-0.89)。每种量表都能区分患有重度抑郁症和非抑郁的患者,但 QIDS-C(16)的准确性略高。
所有三种测试均可有效检测老年重度抑郁,其中 QIDS-C(16)略优。建议使用自报 QIDS-SR(16)作为筛查工具,因为它最便宜且耗时最短。