ArticleBMC psychology2025
Rasch analysis of the six items, self-reported Hamilton depression scale in Chinese patients with major depressive disorder.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the psychometric properties of the adapted 6-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-6) in Chinese patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) using the Rasch model.
methodsThe HAMD-6 was administered to 279 patients with MDD. The Rasch analysis was conducted to evaluate the results in terms of unidimensionality, local dependency, item fit, reliability, orders of rating category, differential item functioning (DIF), and item-person targeting. Transformation from raw score to interval data was generated.
resultsRasch analyses showed the unidimensional construct of HAMD-6. Item2 (Self-esteem and guilt) and item4 (Psychomotor retardation) presented slight dependency (residual correlation = -0.34) and item1 (Depressed mood) presented suspicious misfit (INFIT and OUTFIT ZSTD > 2.00). The reliability was ideal (Cronbach's α = 0.91; person separation index = 2.24). The difficulties of response categories were monotonically increased, with no disorder was found. No DIF was found across gender, age and education. The HAMD-6 showed optimal discriminative ability for individuals with moderate levels of depression. A conversion table was established for raw score to interval data.
conclusionThe HAMD-6 was confirmed acceptable psychometric properties by Rasch model in MDD patients. It provided more optimal discriminative ability for individuals with moderate depression. The conversion table could be used for more precise measurement. However, item1, item2 and item4 needed further validation.
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.