Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30410319›Full record

ReviewClinical interventions in aging2018

Assessment of late-life depression via self-report measures: a review.

Michela Balsamo, Fedele Cataldi, Leonardo Carlucci, Caterina Padulo, Beth Fairfield

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical interventions in aging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04180683 (Comparison Study of the Different Abbreviated Versions of the Geriatric Depression Scale), which is not on this map. Cited by 63 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
36.5field-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.

NCT04180683 completednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Comparison Study of the Different Abbreviated Versions of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) in Elderly With Neurocognitive Disorders Attending Social Responses

TypeobservationalSponsorRsocialform - Geriatria, LdaRan2020 to 2020Enrolled331ConditionsDepression, Depressive Disorder, Neurocognitive Disorders, DementiaArmsBattery of screening tests with semi-structured interview, Battery of screening tests without semi-structured interview
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

63 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Considerations for Use of the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia Among Assisted Living Residents: Factor Analysis Results.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2025
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

3 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michela BalsamoDepartment of Psychological, Health and Territorial Sciences, School of Medicine and Health, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara, Italy, mbalsamo@unich.it.
Fedele CataldiDepartment of Psychological, Health and Territorial Sciences, School of Medicine and Health, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara, Italy, mbalsamo@unich.it.
Leonardo CarlucciDepartment of Psychological, Health and Territorial Sciences, School of Medicine and Health, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara, Italy, mbalsamo@unich.it.
Caterina PaduloDepartment of Psychological, Health and Territorial Sciences, School of Medicine and Health, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara, Italy, mbalsamo@unich.it.
Beth FairfieldDepartment of Psychological, Health and Territorial Sciences, School of Medicine and Health, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara, Italy, mbalsamo@unich.it.
University of Chieti-Pescara · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Depression in later life is a significant and growing problem. Age-related differences in the type and severity of depressive disorders continue to be questioned and necessarily question differential methods of assessment and treatment strategies. A host of geropsychiatric measures have been developed for diagnostic purposes, for rating severity of depression, and monitoring treatment progress. This literature review includes the self-report depression measures commonly and currently used in geropsychological practice. Each of the included measures is considered according to its psychometric properties. In particular, information about reliability; convergent, divergent, and factorial validity evidence based on data from clinical and nonclinical samples of older adults; and availability of age-appropriate norms was provided along with the strengths and weaknesses of each measure. Results highlighted that in cognitively intact or mildly impaired patients over 65 years, the Geriatric Depression Scale and the Geriatric Depression Scale-15 currently seem to be the preferred instruments. The psychometric functioning of the Beck Depression Inventory-II and the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, instead, is mixed in this population. Most importantly, this review may be a valuable resource for practicing clinicians and researchers who wish to develop state-of-the-science assessment strategies for clinical problems and make informed choices about which instruments best suit their purposes in older populations.

Indexed as

PsychometricsAgedDepressive DisorderGeriatric AssessmentHumansLate Onset DisordersPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPsychiatric Status Rating Scalesagingassessmentdepressionolder adultspsychometric functioningself-report

Identifiers

PMID30410319
PMCPMC6199213
OpenAlexW2895853530

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.