Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31307034›Full record

ArticleDementia and geriatric cognitive disorders2019

Validity and Utility of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale for Detecting Depression in Family Caregivers of Persons with Dementia.

Jiangbo Ying, Philip Yap, Mihir Gandhi, Tau Ming Liew

Open access · hybridAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jiangbo YingDepartment of Geriatric Psychiatry, Institute of Mental Health, Singapore, Singapore.
Philip YapDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Mihir GandhiBiostatistics, Singapore Clinical Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore.
Tau Ming LiewDepartment of Geriatric Psychiatry, Institute of Mental Health, Singapore, Singapore, tau_ming_liew@imh.com.sg.
Duke-NUS Medical School · SGInstitute of Mental Health · SGKhoo Teck Puat Hospital · SGNational University of Singapore · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsThe psychometric properties of Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) have never been substantively investigated in caregivers of persons with dementia (PwD). We evaluated the validity and reliability of CES-D for detecting caregiver depression in dementia, and assessed whether CES-D could provide added utility beyond Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI).

methodFamily caregivers of community-dwelling PwD (n = 394) completed self-administered questionnaires containing CES-D. Factorial validity was evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis; convergent and discriminant validity with Pearson's correlation coefficient; known-group validity by comparing across key variables; and internal consistency reliability with Cronbach's α. Cohen's κ was used to compare the agreement between those with depression (CES-D ≥16) and those with high caregiver burden (ZBI >60).

resultsCES-D demonstrated convergent, discriminant and known-group validity, consistent with a priori hypotheses. The original four-factor model of CES-D produced the best model-fit indices. Internal consistency reliability was good for the CES-D total scale (α = 0.92), but lower for the Positive affect and Interpersonal problems subscales (α = 0.70-0.74). Forty-five percent of the caregivers had depression as identified by CES-D (95% CI 40-50%), but most of them were not identified by high ZBI scores (κ = 0.16).

conclusionsCES-D is a valid and reliable scale for detecting caregiver depression in dementia. It has added utility, beyond that of a caregiver burden scale, in identifying a subgroup of caregivers with depression but not burden. However, two subscales (Positive affect and Interpersonal problems) may require caution in interpretation among non-Caucasian caregivers.

Indexed as

DementiaAdultAgedCaregiversCost of IllnessDepressionFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansInterpersonal RelationsMaleMiddle AgedPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesCaregiverCES-DDementiaDepressionReliabilityValidity

Identifiers

PMID31307034
PMCPMC6878745
OpenAlexW2960385417

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.