ArticleAlcoholism, clinical and experimental research2017
The Validity of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale in an Inpatient Sample with Alcohol Dependence.
Article in Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-pharmacological treatment of gambling disorder: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.BMC psychiatry · 2021Pooled it
- Tryptophan-Serotonin-Melatonin Pathway as a Contributor to Changes in Mood and Cognitive Functions Induced by Sleep Deprivation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- The therapeutic potential of ayahuasca in depression, generalized anxiety, and substance use disorders: modulation of the depressive burden in a longitudinal study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Exploring the Relationship Between Behavioral Inhibition and Approach Systems and Alcohol-Related Outcomes in People With Alcohol Use Disorder.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Design, implementation and preliminary results of a type-2 hybrid cluster-randomized trial of integrating screening and treatment for major depressive disorder into specialty clinics providing opioid agonist therapies in Ukraine.Contemporary clinical trials · 2023Article
- Evolution of Cognitive Impairments in Treatment-Resistant Depression: Results from the Longitudinal French Centers of Expertise for Treatment-Resistant Depression (FACE-DR) Cohort.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Receiver operating characteristic curve: overview and practical use for clinicians.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2022Review
- Mechanism and therapeutic strategies of depression after myocardial infarction.Psychopharmacology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is commonly used to examine depressive symptoms in clinical settings, including facilities treating patients for alcohol addiction. No studies have examined the validity of the MADRS compared to an established clinical diagnostic tool of depression in this population. This study aimed to examine the following: (i) the validity of the MADRS compared to a clinical diagnosis of a depressive disorder (using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR [SCID-IV-TR]) in patients seeking treatment for alcohol dependence (AD); (ii) whether the validity of the MADRS differs by type of SCID-IV-TR-based diagnosis of depression; and (iii) which items contribute to the optimal predictive model of the MADRS compared to a SCID-IV-TR diagnosis of a depressive disorder.
methodsIndividuals seeking treatment for AD and admitted to an inpatient unit were administered the MADRS at day 2 of their detoxification program. Clinical diagnoses of AD and depression were made via the SCID-IV-TR at the beginning of treatment.
resultsIn total, 803 participants were included in the study. The MADRS demonstrated low overall accuracy relative to the clinical diagnosis of depression with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.68. The optimal threshold for balancing sensitivity and specificity identified by the Euclidean distance was >14. This cut-point demonstrated a sensitivity of 66%, a specificity of 60%, a positive predictive value of 50%, and a negative predictive value of 75%. The MADRS performed slightly better for major depressive disorders compared to alcohol-induced depression. Items related to lassitude, concentration, and appetite slightly decreased the accuracy of the MADRS.
conclusionsThe MADRS does not appear to be an appropriate substitute for a diagnostic tool among alcohol-dependent patients. The MADRS may, however, still be a useful screening tool assuming careful consideration of cut-points.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.