ArticlePloS one2024
Measurement invariance of the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale and associations with genetic risk in older adults.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Gene-environment interplay in the relationship between the visibility of the environment and self-reported depression in early midlife: a Finnish twin cohort study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs populations are aging, it needs to be ensured that valid depression rating scales are available across old adulthood. Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale (CES-D) is a common depression rating scale, however, few studies have assessed its validity in individuals with age over 90 and/or cognitive impairment. We examined the factor structures of 20-, 15-, and 8-item CES-D scales, their measurement invariance for age and cognition, and associations with genetic risk of depression.
methodsParticipants were from a population-based older Finnish Twin Cohort study including 71-79-year-olds from the MEMTWIN II (n = 1034 for exploratory and n = 664 for confirmatory factor analyses) and 90+ year-olds from the NONAGINTA (n = 134, confirmatory factor analyses) sub-studies. Associations of polygenic risk score of major depressive disorder (MDD-PRS) with CES-D scales were examined in MEMTWIN II.
resultsExploratory factor analyses (n = 1034) suggested four- (CES-D 20) and three-factor (CES-D 8) structures and these models fit well in confirmatory analyses (n = 664). Unidimensional models had good (CES-D 15 & 20) or fair fit (CES-D 8). Results supported scalar invariance of all CES-D versions for age and cognitive status. Higher MDD-PRS was associated with more depressive symptoms in different CES-D versions.
conclusionsDifferent CES-D versions are adequate for measuring depressive symptoms across age groups and cognitive spectrum in old age. Genetic risk of depression predicts depressive symptoms even in old age.
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.