Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28068955›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2017

Validation of the 10-item Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D-10) in Zulu, Xhosa and Afrikaans populations in South Africa.

Emily Claire Baron, Thandi Davies, Crick Lund

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 165 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
165citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
18.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

165 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 326 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Standing up against office sitting: A study protocol.The South African journal of physiotherapy · 2020
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

105 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Emily Claire BaronAlan J Flisher Centre for Public Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Office 32, Building B, 46 Sawkins Road, 7700 Rondebosch, Cape Town, South Africa. emily.baron@uct.ac.za.
Thandi DaviesAlan J Flisher Centre for Public Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Office 32, Building B, 46 Sawkins Road, 7700 Rondebosch, Cape Town, South Africa.
Crick LundAlan J Flisher Centre for Public Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Office 32, Building B, 46 Sawkins Road, 7700 Rondebosch, Cape Town, South Africa.
University of Cape Town · ZAKing's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 10-item Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D-10) is a depression screening tool that has been used in the South African National Income Dynamics Study (NIDS), a national household panel study. This screening tool has not yet been validated in South Africa. This study aimed to establish the reliability and validity of the CES-D-10 in Zulu, Xhosa and Afrikaans. The CES-D-10's psychometric properties were also compared to the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), a depression screening tool already validated in South Africa.

methodsStratified random samples of Xhosa, Afrikaans and Zulu-speaking participants aged 15 years or older (N = 944) were recruited from Cape Town Metro and Ethekwini districts. Face-to-face interviews included socio-demographic questions, the CES-D-10, Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS). Major depression was determined using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. All instruments were translated and back-translated to English. Construct validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis with varimax rotation. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves were used to investigate the CES-D-10 and PHQ-9's criterion validity, and compared using the DeLong method.

resultsOverall, 6.6, 18.0 and 6.9% of the Zulu, Afrikaans and Xhosa samples were diagnosed with depression, respectively. The CES-D-10 had acceptable internal consistency across samples (α = 0.69-0.89), and adequate concurrent validity, when compared to the PHQ-9 and WHODAS. The CES-D-10 area under the Receiver Operator Characteristic curve was good to excellent: 0.81 (95% CI 0.71-0.90) for Zulu, 0.93 (95% CI 0.90-0.96) for Afrikaans, and 0.94 (95% CI 0.89-0.99) for Xhosa. A cut-off of 12, 11 and 13 for Zulu, Afrikaans and Xhosa, respectively, generated the most balanced sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (Zulu: 71.4, 72.6% and 16.1%; Afrikaans: 84.6%, 84.0%, 53.7%; Xhosa: 81.0%, 95.0%, 54.8%). These were slightly higher than those generated for the PHQ-9. The CES-D-10 and PHQ-9 otherwise performed similarly across samples.

conclusionsThe CES-D-10 is a valid, reliable screening tool for depression in Zulu, Xhosa and coloured Afrikaans populations.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedDepressionFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySouth AfricaCES-D-10DepressionPHQ-9PrevalenceScreeningSouth AfricaValidation

Identifiers

PMID28068955
PMCPMC5223549
OpenAlexW2570491098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.