Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26770693›Full record

ArticleSAGE open medicine2013

Performance of the 10-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale for caregiving research.

Elena M Andresen, Katherine Byers, John Friary, Karl Kosloski, Rhonda Montgomery

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SAGE open medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Built Environment and Loneliness Trajectories Among Middle-Aged and Older Adults in China.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Medication adherence, health outcomes, and perceived social performance in Black Americans receiving hemodialysis.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. PERCEPTIONS OF BISEXUAL IDENTITY, OUTNESS, AND MENTAL HEALTH AMONG RACIALLY DIVERSE BISEXUAL WOMEN AND MEN.Self and identity : the journal of the International Society for Self and Identity · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Elena M AndresenInstitute on Development & Disability, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Katherine ByersDepartment of Counseling, Rehabilitation Counseling & Counseling Psychology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.
John FriaryCollege of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Karl KosloskiDepartment of Gerontology, University of Nebraska-Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA.
Rhonda MontgomeryDepartment of Social Work, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

Funding

NCBDD CDC HHS UR3 DD000684
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CESD) scale has been useful in a broad spectrum of health research on patient and population outcomes. A brief version is used when depressive symptoms are not the primary focus. Rasch (item response) analysis previously demonstrated potential problems with positively worded items. We tested the 10-item CESD (CESD-10) scale and considered an 8-item version with both psychometric and Rasch analyses.

methodsThis was a special sample of 2067 caregivers from three existing US databases. We describe item response patterns and internal constancy in addition to Rasch scale results.

resultsThere were few problems with missing data, and internal consistency was high (alpha = 0.86-0.88) for both CESD versions. Rasch analysis indicated that one of the positive items ("hopeful about future") could be dropped.

conclusionsWe partly confirmed prior work that suggested dropping positive items for the CESD-10. Among caregivers, item-level problems and scaling problems seem minimal. At present, there is not a strong rationale for dropping the CESD-10 positive items: the one poorly performing positive item might be explained by the special caregiver sample.

Indexed as

caregivingdepressionPsychometricsquestionnaires/standards

Identifiers

PMID26770693
PMCPMC4687763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.