School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia; Black Dog Institute, Sydney, Australia.
School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia; Black Dog Institute, Sydney, Australia.
J Affect Disord. 2019 Jan 15;243:194-200. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.09.024. Epub 2018 Sep 12.
Differentiating melancholic and non-melancholic depressive disorders and evaluating whether they differ categorically or dimensionally has had a lengthy history, but has not previously been evaluated in a non-clinical adolescent sample.
We studied a sample of 1579 senior high school students and evaluated the capacity of the Sydney Melancholia Prototype Index (SMPI) to differentiate melancholic from non-melancholic depression, both using a 'top down' strategy of imposing a pre-established cut-off score and a 'bottom up' strategy of employing latent class analyses.
The two strategies respectively generated prevalence figures of 3.4% and 8.1% of the students having experienced a melancholic depressive episode and with the difference reflecting the LCA assigning some students who did not reach the pre-established cut-off score for the SMPI in the putative melancholic class. The principal latent class analysis failed to generate pristine melancholic and non-melancholic depressive classes, in that it also generated an 'intermediate' as well as a non-clinical depressive class. Both SMPI strategies identified similar symptoms-such as anhedonia and anergia-and several illness correlates that best differentiated those assigned melancholia status, and both strategies confirmed melancholia assignment being associated with factors indicative of more severe depressive disorders and of likely melancholic depression.
Data were assessed by self-report only, only lifetime depression was assessed, and no other depressive diagnostic validating measure was administered.
The SMPI appears capable of identifying and differentiating melancholic from non-melancholic depression in a non-clinical adolescent sample.
区分忧郁性和非忧郁性抑郁症,并评估它们是在类别上还是在维度上有所不同,这一问题由来已久,但之前尚未在非临床青少年样本中进行过评估。
我们研究了一个由 1579 名高中生组成的样本,使用“自上而下”的策略(即强加预先设定的截止分数)和“自下而上”的策略(即采用潜在类别分析)来评估悉尼忧郁原型指数(SMPI)区分忧郁性和非忧郁性抑郁症的能力。
这两种策略分别产生了 3.4%和 8.1%的学生经历过忧郁性抑郁发作的患病率,差异反映了潜在类别分析将一些未达到 SMPI 假定忧郁类别的预先设定截止分数的学生分配到了忧郁类。主要的潜在类别分析未能产生原始的忧郁性和非忧郁性抑郁类别,因为它还产生了一个“中间”和一个非临床抑郁类别。SMPI 的两种策略都识别出了类似的症状,如快感缺失和无力感,以及一些最能区分被分配到忧郁状态的疾病相关因素,并且两种策略都证实了忧郁性分配与预示更严重抑郁障碍和可能的忧郁性抑郁的因素有关。
数据仅通过自我报告评估,仅评估了终生抑郁,并且没有使用其他抑郁诊断验证措施。
SMPI 似乎能够在非临床青少年样本中识别和区分忧郁性和非忧郁性抑郁症。