Matthey Stephen, Agostini Francesca
South Western Sydney Local Health District, University of Sydney and UNSW, Sydney, Australia.
Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Arch Womens Ment Health. 2017 Apr;20(2):345-354. doi: 10.1007/s00737-016-0710-9. Epub 2017 Jan 11.
The objective of the study was to critically consider some of the possible limitations in the Edinburgh Depression Scale (EDS), given that great emphasis is put on the results of this measure within both clinical and research fields. Using findings and discussion points from other studies, as well as from a critical analysis of issues by the authors based upon their clinical and research experience, possible limitations with the scale in nine areas are discussed. Possible limitations include the following: (1) ambiguous items, (2) exclusion of certain types of distress, (3) scoring difficulties, (4) low positive predictive value, (5) frequent use of incorrect cut-off scores, (6) a vast array of validated cut-off scores, (7) validation against a questionable gold-standard, (8) limited anxiety detection and of depressive symptoms in men, and (9) many screen positive women only have transient distress. While the EDS has unquestionably been an extremely valuable instrument in aiding in the recognition of the importance of perinatal mental health, users of the scale should be aware that it, like other measures, has limitations. We discuss possible strategies to overcome these limitations and describe a recent scale that has been developed to surmount these shortcomings more effectively.
鉴于爱丁堡抑郁量表（EDS）在临床和研究领域都备受重视，本研究的目的是审慎地考量该量表可能存在的一些局限性。通过借鉴其他研究的结果和讨论要点，以及作者基于临床和研究经验对相关问题的批判性分析，探讨了该量表在九个方面可能存在的局限性。可能的局限性包括：（1）条目含糊不清；（2）排除了某些类型的痛苦；（3）评分困难；（4）阳性预测值低；（5）频繁使用错误的临界分数；（6）大量经过验证的临界分数；（7）与有问题的金标准进行验证；（8）对男性焦虑和抑郁症状的检测有限；（9）许多筛查呈阳性的女性只有短暂的痛苦。虽然爱丁堡抑郁量表无疑是帮助认识围产期心理健康重要性的一项极其有价值的工具，但该量表的使用者应意识到，与其他测量方法一样，它也有局限性。我们讨论了克服这些局限性的可能策略，并描述了一种最近开发的量表，该量表能更有效地克服这些缺点。
