Bent-Hansen J, Lauritzen L, Clemmesen L, Lunde M, Kørner A
Department of Psychiatry, Frederiksborg General Hospital, Hillerød, Denmark.
J Affect Disord. 1995 Mar 14;33(3):143-50. doi: 10.1016/0165-0327(94)00057-g.
A definite (anchored) and a semidefinite (semi-anchored) questionnaire version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDS) and the Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale (MES) were compared with the HDS/MES by observer-rating and self-rating of 24 patients fulfilling the DSM-3R criteria for major depressive disorder. Both types of questionnaire showed substantial agreement with the observer scale from which they were derived. The sum scores were for the definite questionnaires and the corresponding observer scales closely similar whereas the sum scores of the semidefinite questionnaires were significantly higher than the sum scores of the corresponding observer scales. These results indicate that patients' 'halo' effect may be avoided by using definite scaling criteria for self-rating. Thus, of the two versions of questionnaires the definite versions are recommended.
对24名符合《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第三版修订本（DSM - 3R）中重度抑郁症标准的患者，采用观察者评分和自评的方式，将汉密尔顿抑郁量表（HDS）和贝克 - 拉法尔森忧郁量表（MES）的确定（固定）版和半确定（半固定）版问卷与HDS/MES进行比较。两种问卷类型与它们所源自的观察者量表都显示出高度一致性。确定问卷的总分与相应观察者量表的总分非常相似，而半确定问卷的总分显著高于相应观察者量表的总分。这些结果表明，通过使用确定的自评量表标准可以避免患者的“光环”效应。因此，在这两种问卷版本中，推荐使用确定版。
