Dunstan Debra A, Scott Ned
School of Behavioural, Cognitive and Social Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
Depress Res Treat. 2018 Jan 21;2018:9250972. doi: 10.1155/2018/9250972. eCollection 2018.
The Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) and Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) are two norm-referenced scales commonly used to identify the presence of depression and anxiety in clinical research. Unfortunately, several researchers have mistakenly applied index score criteria to raw scores when assigning clinical significance and symptom severity ratings. This study examined the extent of this problem.
102 papers published over the six-year period from 2010 to 2015 were used to establish two convenience samples of 60 usages of each Zung scale.
In those papers where cut-off scores were used (i.e., 45/60 for SDS and 40/60 for SAS), up to 51% of SDS and 45% of SAS papers involved the incorrect application of index score criteria to raw scores. Inconsistencies were also noted in the severity ranges and cut-off scores used.
A large percentage of publications involving the Zung SDS and SAS scales are using incorrect criteria for the classification of clinically significant symptoms of depression and anxiety. The most common error-applying index score criteria to raw scores-produces a substantial elevation of the cut-off points for significance. Given the continuing usage of these scales, it is important that these inconsistencies be highlighted and resolved.
zung自评抑郁量表（SDS）和自评焦虑量表（SAS）是临床研究中常用的两种常模参照量表，用于识别抑郁和焦虑症状。不幸的是，一些研究人员在确定临床意义和症状严重程度评分时，错误地将指数评分标准应用于原始分数。本研究调查了这一问题的严重程度。
使用2010年至2015年六年期间发表的102篇论文，建立两个便利样本，每个zung量表各有60次使用。
在使用临界值分数的论文中（即SDS为45/60，SAS为40/60），高达51%的SDS论文和45%的SAS论文将指数评分标准错误地应用于原始分数。在使用的严重程度范围和临界值分数上也存在不一致。
大量涉及zung SDS和SAS量表的出版物在对抑郁和焦虑的临床显著症状进行分类时使用了错误的标准。最常见的错误——将指数评分标准应用于原始分数——导致显著性临界值大幅提高。鉴于这些量表仍在使用，突出并解决这些不一致性很重要。
