The CES-D scale is a short self-report scale designed to measure depressive symptomatology in the general population. The items of the scale are symptoms associated with depression which have been used in previously validated longer scales. The new scale was tested in household interview surveys and in psychiatric settings. It was found to have very high internal consistency and adequate test- retest repeatability. Validity was established by pat terns of correlations with other self-report measures, by correlations with clinical ratings of depression, and by relationships with other variables which support its construct validity. Reliability, validity, and factor structure were similar across a wide variety of demographic characteristics in the general population samples tested. The scale should be a useful tool for epidemiologic studies of de pression.

/pdf/the-ces-d-scale-a-self-report-depression-scale-for-research-3x80ntszkr.pdf

The CES-D Scale: A Self-Report Depression Scale for Research in the General Population

Background. A 10-question screening scale of psychological distress and a six-question short-form scale embedded within the 10-question scale were developed for the redesigned US National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Methods. Initial pilot questions were administered in a US national mail survey (N fl 1401). A reduced set of questions was subsequently administered in a US national telephone survey (N fl 1574). The 10-question and six-question scales, which we refer to as the K10 and K6, were constructed from the reduced set of questions based on Item Response Theory models. The scales were subsequently validated in a two-stage clinical reappraisal survey (N fl 1000 telephone screening interviews in the first stage followed by N fl 153 face-to-face clinical interviews in the second stage that oversampled first-stage respondents who screened positive for emotional problems) in a local convenience sample. The second-stage sample was administered the screening scales along with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). The K6 was subsequently included in the 1997 (N fl 36116) and 1998 (N fl 32440) US National Health Interview Survey, while the K10 was included in the 1997 (N fl 10641) Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-Being. Results. Both the K10 and K6 have good precision in the 90th‐99th percentile range of the population distribution (standard errors of standardized scores in the range 0‐20‐0‐25) as well as consistent psychometric properties across major sociodemographic subsamples. The scales strongly discriminate between community cases and non-cases of DSM-IV}SCID disorders, with areas under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve of 0‐87‐0‐88 for disorders having Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scores of 0‐70 and 0‐95‐0‐96 for disorders having GAF scores of 0‐50. Conclusions. The brevity, strong psychometric properties, and ability to discriminate DSM-IV cases from non-cases make the K10 and K6 attractive for use in general-purpose health surveys. The scales are already being used in annual government health surveys in the US and Canada as well as in the WHO World Mental Health Surveys. Routine inclusion of either the K10 or K6 in clinical studies would create an important, and heretofore missing, crosswalk between community and clinical epidemiology.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/F141675CCD0E08C0FB98E01C006B4E0D/S0033291702006074a.pdf/div-class-title-short-screening-scales-to-monitor-population-prevalences-and-trends-in-non-specific-psychological-distress-div.pdf

Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress.

• A new interview schedule allows lay interviewers or clinicians to make psychiatric diagnoses according to DSM-III criteria, Feighner criteria, and Research Diagnostic Criteria. It is being used in a set of epidemiological studies sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health Center for Epidemiological Studies. Its accuracy has been evaluated in a test-retest design comparing independent administrations by psychiatrists and lay interviewers to 216 subjects (inpatients, outpatients, ex-patients, and nonpatients).

https://jamanetwork.com/HttpHandlers/ArticlePdfHandler.ashx?journal=PSYCH&articleId=492525&pdfFileName=archpsyc_38_4_001.pdf

National Institute of Mental Health diagnostic interview schedule: Its history, characteristics, and validity.

Context Little is known about the extent or severity of untreated mental disorders, especially in less-developed countries. Objective To estimate prevalence, severity, and treatment of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) mental disorders in 14 countries (6 less developed, 8 developed) in the World Health Organization (WHO) World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative. Design, Setting, and Participants Face-to-face household surveys of 60463 community adults conducted from 2001-2003 in 14 countries in the Americas, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. Main Outcome Measures The DSM-IV disorders, severity, and treatment were assessed with the WMH version of the WHO Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WMH-CIDI), a fully structured, lay-administered psychiatric diagnostic interview. Results The prevalence of having any WMH-CIDI/DSM-IV disorder in the prior year varied widely, from 4.3% in Shanghai to 26.4% in the United States, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 9.1%-16.9%. Between 33.1% (Colombia) and 80.9% (Nigeria) of 12-month cases were mild (IQR, 40.2%-53.3%). Serious disorders were associated with substantial role disability. Although disorder severity was correlated with probability of treatment in almost all countries, 35.5%.to 50.3% of serious cases in developed countries and 76.3% to 85.4% in less-developed countries received no treatment in the 12 months before the interview. Due to the high prevalence of mild and subthreshold cases, the number of those who received treatment far exceeds the number of untreated serious cases in every country. Conclusions Reallocation of treatment resources could substantially decrease the problem of unmet need for treatment of mental disorders among serious cases. Structural barriers exist to this reallocation. Careful consideration needs to be given to the value of treating some mild cases,. especially those at risk for progressing to more serious disorders.

/pdf/prevalence-severity-and-unmet-need-for-treatment-of-mental-296czu49lz.pdf

Prevalence, severity, and unmet need for treatment of mental disorders in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys.

• Lifetime rates are presented for 15 DSM-III psychiatric diagnoses evaluated in three large household samples on the basis of lay interviewers' use of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. The most common diagnoses were alcohol abuse and dependence, phobia, major depressive episode, and drug abuse and dependence. Disorders that most clearly predominated in men were antisocial personality and alcohol abuse and dependence. Disorders that most clearly predominated in women were depressive episodes and phobias. The age group with highest rates for most disorders was found to be young adults (aged 25 to 44 years). Correlates with race, education, and urbanization are presented.

Thomas S. Langner

Papers

A twenty-two item screening score of psychiatric symptoms indicating impairment.

Mental Health in the Metropolis: The Midtown Manhattan Study.

Mental Health in the Metropolis

Life Stress and Mental Health

Mental Health in the Metropolis: The Midtown Manhattan Study