Comparison of Three Depression Rating Scales

1992 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey M. Margo ◽  
Mantosh J. Dewan ◽  
Seymour Fisher ◽  
Roger P. Greenberg
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scales ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
The Self ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Check List ◽  
Extra Effort ◽  
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Symptom Check List ◽  
Psychiatric Rating ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scale

We directly compared scores on the self-rated Beck Depression Inventory with two other common rating scales that assess a wider range of psychopathology, including depression, the self-rated Symptom Check List-90—R (SCL-90—R), and the clinician-rated Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale for 71 inpatients who suffered from depression ( n = 50) and other disorders. All measures of depression showed robust correlations among themselves. The self-rated scales correlated better between themselves than with the clinician-rated scale. Since the SCL-90—R assesses depression as well as the Beck inventories, is also a self-report instrument, yet provides a richer description of psychopathology with little extra effort, it may have some advantage over the latter.

Use of Animals in the Rehabilitation of Psychiatric Inpatients

1986 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan M. Beck ◽  
Louisa Seraydarian ◽  
G. Frederick Hunter
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scales ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Psychiatric Inpatients ◽  
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scales ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Psychiatric Rating ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Activity Groups ◽  
The Impact

This study compared the impact of therapy and activity groups on two matched groups of 8 and 9 psychiatric inpatients. Daily sessions of the groups were held for 11 wk. in identical rooms except for the presence of caged finches in one of the rooms. The patients were evaluated before and after the sessions using standard psychiatric rating scales. The group who met in the room that contained animals (a cage with four finches) had significantly better attendance and participation and significantly improved in areas assessed by the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Other positive trends indicated that the study should be replicated with larger samples and modified to increase interactions with the animals.

Discussion 5

2000 ◽  
Vol 12 (S1) ◽  
pp. 279-280
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Training ◽  
Rating Scales ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Psychological Symptoms ◽  
Drug Effects ◽  
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Semistructured Interviews ◽  
Psychiatric Rating ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Behavioral And Psychological Symptoms

Numerous rating scales are available to assess specific behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) and BPSD in general. One of the most commonly used scales is the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), which was developed nearly 40 years ago and has been partially validated for use in patients with dementia. Dr. Tariot commented that use of the BPRS requires extensive clinical training to conduct the semistructured interviews and to probe, gauge, and weigh data in a way that reflects clinical reasoning, thinking, and judgment. In contrast, a scale such as the Neuropsychiatric Inventory, which covers a broad spectrum of BPSD, can be administered by a healthcare professional without extensive clinical training; this is both a strength and a weakness. Dr. Sultzer recognized the value of both types of scales, those that require semistructured interviews and those that are largely observational, and suggested that using different combinations of scales in research studies may be valuable. Although the BPRS is an older scale that some researchers believe is inappropriate for use in patients with dementia, Dr. Mintzer noted that the BPRS and its subscales have been used successfully over the past few years to differentiate drug effects from placebo in this patient population.

Mentored Self-Help: A Promising Approach to Exploring Voices

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-124
Author(s):  
Willa J. Casstevens ◽  
Joy Coker ◽  
Tia D. Sanders
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Comparison Group ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
The Self ◽  
Anxiety And Depression ◽  
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Self Help ◽  
Psychiatric Rating ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Study Participants

This article explores voice-hearing experiences in the context of a mentored self-help approach to coping that used the workbook Working With Voices (Coleman & Smith, 1997) with the support of a trusted other or mentor. Casstevens, Cohen, Newman, and Dumaine (2006) found that the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) factor of anxious depression improved significantly post–workbook completion relative to a comparison group, although BPRS global psychopathology scores did not change significantly (n = 27). Further exploration of available voice-hearing data was indicated, and the present study examined Topography of Voices Rating Scale (TVRS) scores and participant-reported stressors. The TVRS was completed by intervention-group participants (n = 16) without oversight, and 9 participants provided consistently complete TVRS forms that could be scored and graphed. For these participants, no connection was observed between TVRS scores and the presence or absence of reported stressors. Furthermore, pre–post difference scores for the TVRS were relatively unchanged. No evidence of harm was found, indicating that for study participants, the self-help approach reduced anxiety and depression without exacerbating voice hearing.

Relationship between the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale and the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List for Schizophrenic Women

1974 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert A. Steer
Keyword(s):  
Principal Component Analysis ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Check List ◽  
Adjective Check List ◽  
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Psychiatric Rating ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Anxiety Depression ◽  
Affect Adjective

The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale and Multiple Affect Adjective Check List were administered to 75 schizophrenic women. A principal component analysis of the correlations between the former instrument's 18 symptoms and the latter instrument's measures of Anxiety, Depression, and Hostility indicated that the checklist's scales loaded together on one component along with the rating scale's symptom of hallucinatory behavior. The conclusion was drawn that the scales had measured different aspects of psychopathology in schizophrenic women.

Single i.v. ketamine augmentation of newly initiated escitalopram for major depression: results from a randomized, placebo-controlled 4-week study

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 623-635 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y.-D. Hu ◽  
Y.-T. Xiang ◽  
J.-X. Fang ◽  
S. Zu ◽  
S. Sha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Depressive Symptomatology ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Young Mania ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Antidepressant Efficacy ◽  
Psychiatric Rating ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scale

BackgroundWhile oral antidepressants reach efficacy after weeks, single-dose intravenous (i.v.) ketamine has rapid, yet time-limited antidepressant effects. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of single-dose i.v. ketamine augmentation of escitalopram in major depressive disorder (MDD).MethodThirty outpatients with severe MDD (17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score ⩾24) were randomized to 4 weeks double-blind treatment with escitalopram 10 mg/day+single-dose i.v. ketamine (0.5 mg/kg over 40 min) or escitalopram 10 mg/day + placebo (0.9% i.v. saline). Depressive symptoms were measured using the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology – Self-Report (QIDS-SR). Suicidal ideation was evaluated with the QIDS-SR item 12. Adverse psychopathological effects were measured with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS)-positive symptoms, Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and Clinician Administered Dissociative States Scale (CADSS). Patients were assessed at baseline, 1, 2, 4, 24 and 72 h and 7, 14, 21 and 28 days. Time to response (⩾50% MADRS score reduction) was the primary outcome.ResultsBy 4 weeks, more escitalopram + ketamine-treated than escitalopram + placebo-treated patients responded (92.3% v. 57.1%, p = 0.04) and remitted (76.9% v. 14.3%, p = 0.001), with significantly shorter time to response [hazard ratio (HR) 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01–0.22, p < 0.001] and remission (HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02–0.63, p = 0.01). Compared to escitalopram + placebo, escitalopram + ketamine was associated with significantly lower MADRS scores from 2 h to 2 weeks [(peak = 3 days–2 weeks; effect size (ES) = 1.08–1.18)], QIDS-SR scores from 2 h to 2 weeks (maximum ES = 1.27), and QIDS-SR suicidality from 2 to 72 h (maximum ES = 2.24). Only YMRS scores increased significantly with ketamine augmentation (1 and 2 h), without significant BPRS or CADSS elevation.ConclusionsSingle-dose i.v. ketamine augmentation of escitalopram was safe and effective in severe MDD, holding promise for speeding up early oral antidepressant efficacy.

scholarly journals Which biological and self-report measures of cannabis use predict cannabis dependency and acute psychotic-like effects?

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (09) ◽  
pp. 1574-1580 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Valerie Curran ◽  
Chandni Hindocha ◽  
Celia J. A. Morgan ◽  
Natacha Shaban ◽  
Ravi K. Das ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Drug Effects ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Cannabis Use ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Three Samples ◽  
Psychiatric Rating ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Drug Free

AbstractBackgroundChanges in cannabis regulation globally make it increasingly important to determine what predicts an individual's risk of experiencing adverse drug effects. Relevant studies have used diverse self-report measures of cannabis use, and few include multiple biological measures. Here we aimed to determine which biological and self-report measures of cannabis use predict cannabis dependency and acute psychotic-like symptoms.MethodIn a naturalistic study, 410 young cannabis users were assessed once when intoxicated with their own cannabis and once when drug-free in counterbalanced order. Biological measures of cannabinoids [(Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol(THC),cannabidiol(CBD),cannabinol(CBN) and their metabolites)] were derived from three samples: each participant's own cannabis (THC, CBD), a sample of their hair (THC, THC-OH, THC-COOH, CBN, CBD) and their urine (THC-COOH/creatinine). Comprehensive self-report measures were also obtained. Self-reported and clinician-rated assessments were taken for cannabis dependency [Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS), DSM-IV-TR] and acute psychotic-like symptoms [Psychotomimetic State Inventory (PSI) and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS)].ResultsCannabis dependency was positively associated with days per month of cannabis use on both measures, and with urinary THC-COOH/creatinine for the SDS. Acute psychotic-like symptoms were positively associated with age of first cannabis use and negatively with urinary THC-COOH/creatinine; no predictors emerged for BPRS.ConclusionsLevels of THC exposure are positively associated with both cannabis dependency and tolerance to the acute psychotic-like effects of cannabis. Combining urinary and self-report assessments (use frequency; age first used) enhances the measurement of cannabis use and its association with adverse outcomes.

Commentary

2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Richard T. Katz
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Behavioral Disorders ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Behavioral Disorder ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Psychiatric Rating ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Mental And Behavioral Disorders

Abstract The author, who is the editor of the Mental and Behavioral Disorders chapter of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, comments on the previous article, Assessing Mental and Behavioral Disorder Impairment: Overview of Sixth Edition Approaches in this issue of The Guides Newsletter. The new Mental and Behavioral Disorders (M&BD) chapter, like others in the AMA Guides, is a consensus opinion of many authors and thus reflects diverse points of view. Psychiatrists and psychologists continue to struggle with diagnostic taxonomies within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, but anxiety, depression, and psychosis are three unequivocal areas of mental illness for which the sixth edition of the AMA Guides provides M&BD impairment rating. Two particular challenges faced the authors of the chapter: how could M&BD disorders be rated (and yet avoid an onslaught of attorney requests for an M&BD rating in conjunction with every physical impairment), and what should be the maximal impairment rating for a mental illness. The sixth edition uses three scales—the Psychiatric Impairment Rating Scale, the Global Assessment of Function, and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale—after careful review of a wide variety of indices. The AMA Guides remains a work in progress, but the authors of the M&BD chapter have taken an important step toward providing a reasonable method for estimating impairment.

Problèmes méthodologiques posés par la classification des formes de schizophrénie: recherche de corrélations ou de relations d'appartenance?

1987 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 174-187
Author(s):  
Monique de Bonis ◽  
Paul de Boeck ◽  
Marie-Odile Lebeaux
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale ◽  
Psychiatric Rating ◽  
Psychiatric Rating Scale

RésuméLe présent travail comporte une critique de la méthodologie employée pour définir une typologie des schizophrènes et une étude empirique de la distinction entre forme productive et forme déficitaire.Après avoir souligné que les études factorielles visant l’identification de deux types de schizophrènes reposaient sur des choix méthodologiques discutables: recherche de corrélations entre variables, alors qu’il s’agit de découvrir des corrélations entre sujets; préférence pour des relations symétriques, alors que les liaisons sont probablement d’ordre asymétrique, les auteurs présentent deux études empiriques.La première réalisée sur un échantillon de 99 schizophrènes s’appuie sur la factorisation des estimations de la symptomatologie (BPRS* á 42 items) à l’aide de la méthode factorielle en plan Q et d’une analyse des correspondances. La seconde a porté sur un sous-échantillon de 52 schizophrènes à l’aide d’une nouvelle méthode d’analyse hiérarchique (HICLAS). Les résultats de ces analyses aboutissent aux conclusions suivantes. Les résultats des analyses factorielles montrent: • qu’il existe plus de deux formes de schizophrènie et qu’à l’intérieur des classes formées par les individus l’opposition déficitaire -productif est stable quelle que soit la métrique utilisée; • que cette opposition repose principalement, pour ce qui est de la forme déficitaire sur 3 symptômes: l’émoussement affectif, le retrait affectif et le ralentissement, et pour ce qui est de la forme productive sur l’humeur expansive, l’attitude manipulatoire, l’excitation, la dramatisation et la labilit émotionnelle; • que contrairement aux travaux antérieurs ni les hallucinations ni la désorganisation conceptuelle ne permettent d’établir la différence entre les deux groupes de malades sans doute parce qu’elles sont communes à tous les schizophrènes; • qu’il n’y a pas de correspondance entre les diagnostics cliniques et les formes décrites; et, • que les malades les plus déficitaires (situés aux extrêmités du pole factoriel) se différencient des malades productifs essentiellement par des variables liées au sexe (plus d’hommes que de femmes dans le premier cas), un statut marital de célibat plus fréquent, et des antécédents psychiatriques plus importants. Les résultats des analyses factorielles soulignent d’une part que les types mixtes sont plus fréquents que les types purs et, d’autre part qu’il suffit de moins de 10 symptômes pour réaliser une opposition satisfaisante entre forme productive et forme déficitaire (Tableau 3, figure 1).Toutes ces conclusions sont valables aussi pour l’analyse hiérarchique. Mais de plus, cette méthode permet d’individualiser un groupe de malades “purs” dans la forme déficitaire seulement, groupe disjoint des autres individus sur la base d’un très petit nombre de symptômes. A côté de ces types purs figurent des types mixtes, qui possédent à la fois des symptômes déficitaires et des symptômes productifs suivant des combinaisons hiérarchiques précises, c’est-à-dire avec une dominance de l’une ou de l’autre forme. Il existe aussi des formes résiduelles dans lesquelles aucune hiérarchie ne peut être mise au jour (Tableau 4).En conclusion on a insisté, outre les problèmes méthodologiques négligés dans les précédentes recherches, sur l’existence d’une dissymétrie entre la forme déficitaire et la forme productive, dans la mesure où c’est seulement la forme déficitaire qui présente une grande singularité et sur l’importance des symptômes liés à la vie affective et à son appauvrissement qui ont un pouvoir discriminatif plus élevé que les symptômes productifs.*BPRS = Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document