• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

明尼苏达多相人格调查表抑郁量表的临床关联

Clinical correlates of MMPI depression scales.

作者信息

Streit K, Greene R L, Cogan R, Davis H G

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Texas Tech University, Lubbock 79407-2051.

出版信息

J Pers Assess. 1993 Apr;60(2):390-6. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6002_14.

DOI:10.1207/s15327752jpa6002_14
PMID:8473972
Abstract

We investigated whether Scale 2 (Depression [D]) and the Wiggins Content Scale of Depression (DEP) of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) have different clinical correlates when only one of these two scales is elevated. According, a group of patients who elevated DEP higher than Scale 2 (DEP > 2) were compared with a group of patients who elevated Scale 2 higher than DEP (2 > DEP). The patients with DEP > 2 were rated as being less severe than the patients with 2 > DEP on the following Brief Psychiatric Rating Scales: Somatic Concern (SOM), Emotional Withdrawal (WDRA), Depressive Mood (DEP), and Blunted Affect (AFF). The patients with DEP > 2 were rated as more severe on Excitement (EXC). The patients with DEP > 2 were more likely to receive the Axis I diagnoses of: bipolar disorder, manic, and alcohol abuse. Schizophrenia was equally probable for patients in the two groups. It appears that these two MMPI scales of depression have different clinical correlates when either one scale or the other is elevated.

摘要

我们研究了明尼苏达多相人格调查表(MMPI)的量表2(抑郁[D])和威金斯抑郁内容量表(DEP)在只有其中一个量表升高时是否具有不同的临床关联。据此,将一组DEP量表得分高于量表2(DEP > 2)的患者与一组量表2得分高于DEP(2 > DEP)的患者进行了比较。在以下简明精神病评定量表上,DEP > 2的患者被评定为比2 > DEP的患者病情较轻:躯体关注(SOM)、情绪退缩(WDRA)、抑郁情绪(DEP)和情感迟钝(AFF)。DEP > 2的患者在兴奋(EXC)方面被评定为病情更严重。DEP > 2的患者更有可能被诊断为轴I障碍:双相情感障碍,躁狂发作,以及酒精滥用。两组患者患精神分裂症的可能性相同。当其中一个量表升高时,这两个MMPI抑郁量表似乎具有不同的临床关联。

相似文献

1
Clinical correlates of MMPI depression scales.明尼苏达多相人格调查表抑郁量表的临床关联
J Pers Assess. 1993 Apr;60(2):390-6. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6002_14.
2
The MCMI-II depression scales: do they assist in the differential prediction of depressive disorders?米隆临床多轴问卷第二版(MCMI-II)抑郁量表:它们有助于对抑郁症进行鉴别预测吗?
J Pers Assess. 1991 Jun;56(3):478-86. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5603_9.
3
Subtle-obvious scales of the MMPI: indicators of profile validity in a psychiatric population.明尼苏达多相人格调查表(MMPI)的细微-明显量表:精神科人群中剖析图效度的指标
J Pers Assess. 1991 Jun;56(3):536-44. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5603_14.
4
Distinguishing bipolar depression, major depression, and schizophrenia with the MMPI-2 clinical and content scales.使用明尼苏达多项人格测验第二版(MMPI-2)临床量表和内容量表区分双相抑郁症、重度抑郁症和精神分裂症。
J Pers Assess. 2005 Feb;84(1):89-95. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8401_15.
5
[Examination of the criterion validity of the MMPI-2 Depression, Anxiety, and Anger Content scales].[明尼苏达多相人格调查表-2抑郁、焦虑和愤怒内容量表的效标效度检验]
Turk Psikiyatri Derg. 2008 Spring;19(1):57-66.
6
Convergent validity of the MMPI-A and MACI scales of depression.明尼苏达多相人格测验第二版青少年版(MMPI-A)与儿童青少年人格问卷(MACI)抑郁量表的聚合效度。
Psychol Rep. 2009 Oct;105(2):605-9. doi: 10.2466/PR0.105.2.605-609.
7
Confirmatory factor analyses of the Anxiety and Depression content scales of the MMPI-2.明尼苏达多相人格调查表第二版(MMPI - 2)焦虑和抑郁分量表的验证性因素分析。
J Pers Assess. 1997 Jun;68(3):678-91. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6803_13.
8
An MMPI-2 portrait of narcissism.明尼苏达多项人格测验第二版(MMPI-2)中的自恋型人格画像。
J Pers Assess. 1996 Feb;66(1):1-19. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_1.
9
The Depressive Experiences Questionnaire: validity and psychological correlates in a clinical sample.抑郁体验问卷:临床样本中的效度及心理关联
J Pers Assess. 1990 Summer;54(3-4):523-33. doi: 10.1080/00223891.1990.9674017.
10
Impact of simulating borderline personality disorder on the MMPI-2: a costs-benefits model employing base rates.模拟边缘型人格障碍对明尼苏达多相人格调查表第二版(MMPI-2)的影响:一种采用基础比率的成本效益模型。
J Pers Assess. 1995 Apr;64(2):295-311. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6402_9.