A factor analytic comparison of three commonly used depression scales (HAMD, MADRS, BDI) in a large sample of depressed inpatients

Research output: Contribution to journalResearch articleContributedpeer-review

Contributors

  • Florian Seemüller - , Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, kbo-Lech-Mangfall-Klinik Garmisch-Partenkirchen (Author)
  • Rebecca Schennach - , Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Schoen Clinic Roseneck (Author)
  • Richard Musil - , Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich (Author)
  • Michael Obermeier - , Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich (Author)
  • Mazda Adli - , Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Fliedner Klinik Berlin (Author)
  • Michael Bauer - , Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy (Author)
  • Peter Brieger - , Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, kbo-Isar-Amper-Clinics Munich (Author)
  • Gerd Laux - , Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich (Author)
  • Wolfgang Gaebel - , Düsseldorf University of Applied Sciences (Author)
  • Peter Falkai - , Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich (Author)
  • Michael Riedel - , Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich, Marion von Tessin Memory-Zentrum, München (Author)
  • Hans-Jürgen Möller - , Hospital of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich (Author)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Quantifying depression mainly relies on the use of depression scales, and understanding their factor structure is crucial for evaluating their validity.

METHODS: This post-hoc analysis utilized prospectively collected data from a naturalistic study of 1014 inpatients with major depression. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were performed to test the psychometric abilities of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale, and the self-rated Beck Depression Inventory. A combined factor analysis was also conducted including all items of all scales.

RESULTS: All three scales showed good to very good internal consistency. The HAMD-17 had four factors: an "anxiety" factor, a "depression" factor, an "insomnia" factor, and a "somatic" factor. The MADRS also had four factors: a "sadness" factor, a neurovegetative factor, a "detachment" factor and a "negative thoughts" factor, while the BDI had three factors: a "negative attitude towards self" factor, a "performance impairment" factor, and a "somatic" factor. The combined factor analysis suggested that self-ratings might reflect a distinct illness dimension within major depression.

CONCLUSIONS: The factors obtained in this study are comparable to those found in previous research. Self and clinician ratings are complementary and not redundant, highlighting the importance of using multiple measures to quantify depression.

Details

Original languageEnglish
Article number548
Number of pages12
JournalBMC psychiatry
Volume23 (2023)
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 28 Jul 2023
Peer-reviewedYes

External IDs

PubMedCentral PMC10386606
Scopus 85165963513
ORCID /0000-0002-2666-859X/work/150883558

Keywords

Keywords

  • Anxiety, Anxiety Disorders, Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis, Humans, Inpatients, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results

Library keywords