Bech P, Gjerris A, Andersen J, Rafaelsen O J
Psychopathology. 1984;17(5-6):244-52. doi: 10.1159/000284058.
In this study we have examined four parts of the 5th revision of the World Health Organization schedule for Standardized Assessment of Depressive Disorders (WHO/SADD-5): (I) items that cover the present depressive state; (II) items that cover the psychiatric history; (III) a global assessment scale for the severity of depression, and (IV) the current ICD-9 diagnosis. Our analysis was based on a comparison of the interobserver reliability of item combinations leading to DSM-III, RDC, Newcastle and Melancholia Scale classifications of patients with depressive disorders. To facilitate these combinations we had added 4 items to SADD: (a) quality of depression, (b) persistence of depression, (c) reactivity of symptoms, and (d) accusations of others. Our results showed that WHO/SADD-5 has an acceptable degree of interobserver reliability both at the levels of global assessment of severity of depression and ICD-9 diagnosis, whereas the item combinations obtained lower intraclass coefficients. However, the items analysis focused on two SADD subscales of acceptable interobserver reliability: a severity scale of 16 items selected from our Melancholia Scale, and a diagnostic scale of another 10 items selected from the two Newcastle Scales.
在本研究中，我们对世界卫生组织《抑郁障碍标准化评估表》第5版（WHO/SADD - 5）的四个部分进行了检验：（I）涵盖当前抑郁状态的条目；（II）涵盖精神病史的条目；（III）抑郁严重程度的整体评估量表；以及（IV）当前的ICD - 9诊断。我们的分析基于对导致抑郁障碍患者DSM - III、RDC、纽卡斯尔和忧郁症量表分类的条目组合的观察者间信度的比较。为便于这些组合，我们在SADD中增加了4个条目：（a）抑郁性质；（b）抑郁持续时间；（c）症状反应性；以及（d）对他人的指责。我们的结果表明，WHO/SADD - 5在抑郁严重程度的整体评估和ICD - 9诊断层面均具有可接受程度的观察者间信度，而条目组合的组内相关系数较低。然而，条目分析聚焦于两个具有可接受观察者间信度的SADD子量表：一个是从我们的忧郁症量表中选取的16个条目的严重程度量表，另一个是从两个纽卡斯尔量表中选取的另外10个条目的诊断量表。
