Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27127628›Full record

ArticleSAGE open medicine2016

Validity of Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale in a sample of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans.

Ana R Quiñones, Stephen M Thielke, Michael E Clark, Kristin M Phillips, Christine Elnitsky, Elena M Andresen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SAGE open medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. East African HIV care: depression and HIV outcomes.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2019
    Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Ana R QuiñonesSchool of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA; Portland VA Medical Center, Portland, OR, USA.
Stephen M ThielkeGeriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Centers, Puget Sound VA Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Michael E ClarkChronic Pain Rehabilitation Program, VA National Polytrauma Pain Workgroup, James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital, Tampa, FL, USA; Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.
Kristin M PhillipsCancer and Palliative Care Programs, James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital, Tampa, FL, USA.
Christine ElnitskySchool of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Elena M AndresenSchool of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.

Funding

Development and Evaluation of a Depression Risk CalculatorK23MH093591 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI THIELKE, STEPHEN M. · 2010 to 2013
$474k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH093591
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOptimal depression screening necessitates measurement tools that are valid across varied populations and in the presence of comorbidities.

methodsThis study assessed the test properties of two versions of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale against psychiatric diagnoses established by the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview among a clinical sample of US Veterans deployed during Operations Enduring Freedom, Iraqi Freedom, and New Dawn. Participants (N = 359) recruited from two Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals completed a clinical interview, structured diagnostic interview, and self-reported measures.

resultsBased on diagnostic interview and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th Edition criteria, 29.5% of the sample met diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder and 26.5% met diagnostic criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder. Both Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-20 and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-10 scales performed well and almost identically against the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview-major depressive disorder in identifying Veterans with major depressive disorder (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-20 area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve 91%; Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-10 area under the ROC curve 90%). Overall, higher cut points for the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scales performed better in correctly identifying true positives and true negatives for major depressive disorder (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-20 cut point 18+ sensitivity 92% specificity 72%; Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression-10 cut point 10+ sensitivity 92% specificity 69%).

conclusionsThe specificity of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scales was poor among Veterans with co-occurring post-traumatic stress disorder (13% and 16%). Veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder who have a positive depression screen should have a more thorough assessment of mental health symptoms and comorbidities, rather than immediate diagnosis of and treatment for depression.

Indexed as

Depressionmajor depressive disorderpost-traumatic stress disorderpsychometricsVeterans

Identifiers

PMID27127628
PMCPMC4834469

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.