ArticleBMC psychiatry2026
A psychometric assessment of the factor structure and reliability of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) questionnaire in four African nations.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) is commonly used to identify people at risk for clinical depression in HIV care and research settings in Africa, though it has not been validated in these settings. We examined the psychometric properties of the CES-D in people living with (PLWH) and without HIV (PLWoH) in four African countries.
methodsThe African Cohort Study (AFRICOS) administers the CES-D biannually to participants aged 15 years or older in Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Uganda. The CES-D is completed in English, Kiswahili, or Luganda. Exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were each performed in separate subsamples. Longitudinal measurement invariance and invariance by nation, language, sex, and HIV status were examined. CES-D score distributions, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability were reported.
resultsThere were 3320 participants: 1663 (50%) exploratory sample, 1397 (42%) males, and 2732 (82%) PLWH. EFA supported a 1- or 2-factor solution. CFA confirmed 1-factor solution with a method factor for reverse-scored items. Configural, metric, and either scalar or partial scalar invariance were established for all variables examined. Collapsing across samples, the median CES-D score was 3; internal consistency was α = 0.89; and 6- and 12-month test-retest reliabilities were ρ = 0.37 and 0.33, respectively.
conclusionsThese results have positive implications for using the CES-D in African nations and PLWH. That the four reverse-scored items are not a second factor, but covary due to methodological issues, has implications that transcend specific samples. Further research is needed to establish validity in African nations and PLWH. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.