门诊青少年抑郁自我报告与临床评分的比较

Depression Pub Date : 1995-01-01 DOI:10.1002/depr.3050030310
Mark A. Reinecke Ph.D., Theresa M. Schultz M.A.
{"title":"门诊青少年抑郁自我报告与临床评分的比较","authors":"Mark A. Reinecke Ph.D.,&nbsp;Theresa M. Schultz M.A.","doi":"10.1002/depr.3050030310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>To determine whether adolescents' scores on clinician-ating and self–report scales for depression were comparable, a sample of 43 adolescent outpatients completed four objective, self–report questionnaires. Their scores on these measures were compared with each other and with clinicians' scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Correlations between the self-report questionnaires ranged from .52 to .88 (P ± .001); whereas their correlations with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ranged from .56 to .66. While supportive of the convergent validity of these measures, our findings suggest that important differences exist between alternative measures of depression, and that scores derived from different scales may not be equivalent. Depression 3:139–145 (1995). © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.</p>","PeriodicalId":11179,"journal":{"name":"Depression","volume":"3 3","pages":"139-145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/depr.3050030310","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of self–report and clinician ratings of depression among outpatient adolescents\",\"authors\":\"Mark A. Reinecke Ph.D.,&nbsp;Theresa M. Schultz M.A.\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/depr.3050030310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>To determine whether adolescents' scores on clinician-ating and self–report scales for depression were comparable, a sample of 43 adolescent outpatients completed four objective, self–report questionnaires. Their scores on these measures were compared with each other and with clinicians' scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Correlations between the self-report questionnaires ranged from .52 to .88 (P ± .001); whereas their correlations with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ranged from .56 to .66. While supportive of the convergent validity of these measures, our findings suggest that important differences exist between alternative measures of depression, and that scores derived from different scales may not be equivalent. Depression 3:139–145 (1995). © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11179,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Depression\",\"volume\":\"3 3\",\"pages\":\"139-145\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1995-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/depr.3050030310\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Depression\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/depr.3050030310\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Depression","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/depr.3050030310","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

为了确定青少年在抑郁症临床诊断和自我报告量表上的得分是否具有可比性,43名青少年门诊患者完成了四份客观的自我报告问卷。他们在这些措施上的得分相互比较,并与临床医生在汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表上的得分进行比较。自述问卷的相关系数为0.52 ~ 0.88 (P±0.001);而他们与汉密尔顿抑郁量表的相关性在0.56到0.66之间。虽然支持这些测量的收敛有效性,但我们的研究结果表明,不同的抑郁测量方法之间存在重要差异,不同量表得出的分数可能不相等。抑郁症:139 - 145(1995)。©1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of self–report and clinician ratings of depression among outpatient adolescents

To determine whether adolescents' scores on clinician-ating and self–report scales for depression were comparable, a sample of 43 adolescent outpatients completed four objective, self–report questionnaires. Their scores on these measures were compared with each other and with clinicians' scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Correlations between the self-report questionnaires ranged from .52 to .88 (P ± .001); whereas their correlations with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ranged from .56 to .66. While supportive of the convergent validity of these measures, our findings suggest that important differences exist between alternative measures of depression, and that scores derived from different scales may not be equivalent. Depression 3:139–145 (1995). © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Depression Throughout the Life Course Charting a New Future for Depression What Can the Depressed Person do for Themself? Environmental and Psychological Contributions to Depression The Prevalence of Depression
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1