Development and validation of a computer-administered version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale.

A computer-administered form of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression was designed to provide scores with a high degree of correspondence with the clinician-administered 17-item version of the scale. Both forms of the Hamilton scale were administered in a counterbalanced design to 97 subjects, including 52 outpatients with a Research Diagnostic Criteria diagnosis of Major Depression, 20 outpatients with Minor Depression, and 25 nonpsychiatric control subjects. Both the computer- and clinician-administered interviews demonstrated high internal consistency reliability of .91 and .90, respectively. A correlation of .96 was found between the two versions, and the mean score difference between the two forms was nonsignificant for the total sample. Both forms also demonstrated clinical sensitivity and specificity in differentiating between Major and Minor Depression and Control group subjects. Overall results support the clinical and research use of the computer administered version of the Hamilton scale. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A computer-administered version of the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale.

The Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) was converted to an interactive computer-administered format. To examine its utility, the computer version of the Y-BOCS was administered in a design counterbalanced with the clinician-administered version to a sample of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), patients with other anxiety disorders, and nonpatient controls. The computer-administered version of the Y-BOCS correlated highly with the clinician-administered version, especially in the OCD sample, and showed equal ability to distinguish OCD patients from Ss in the other 2 groups. It was also well understood and liked by Ss, who showed no preference for the clinician interview over the computer interview. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A structured interview version of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression: Reliability and validity.

Reliability and validity data are provided for pre- and posttreatment administrations of a structured interview version of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) integrated with the National Institute of Mental Health Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS). Ss were 70 adult patients requesting therapy for depression. Results indicate excellent agreement between DIS–HRSD ratings made by graduate students and psychiatrist-administered HRSD ratings. The DIS–HRSD exhibited a pattern of correlation with other scales of depression similar to that of the HRSD, thus supporting the validity of the new scale. Intraclass correlations and concurrent validity estimates obtained from analyzing data separately for pre- and posttest administrations were consistently lower than those obtained from the whole sample, suggesting that methodological shortcomings in prior psychometric studies of the HRSD may have spuriously inflated the obtained results. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reliability and validity of the Hamilton Depression Inventory: A paper-and-pencil version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale Clinical Interview.

A self-report, paper-and-pencil version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS; M. Hamilton, 1960) was developed. This measure, the Hamilton Depression Inventory (HDI; W. M. Reynolds & K. A. Kobak, 1995) consists of a 23-item full form, a 17-item form, and a 9-item short form. The 17-item HDI form corresponds in content and scoring to the standard 17-item HDRS. With a sample of psychiatric outpatients with major depression (n?=?140 ), anxiety disorders (n?=?99), and nonreferred community adults (n?=?118), the HDI forms demonstrated high levels of reliability (rα?=?.91 to .94, rtt?=?.95 to .96). Extensive validity evidence was presented, including content, criterion related, construct, and clinical efficacy of the HDI cutoff score. Overall, the data support the reliability and validity of the HDI as a self-report measure of severity of depression. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sensitivity of the six-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale

The B lymphoproliferative disorders are a major (10%) and severe (70% mortality) complication of immunosuppression required for HLA-mismatched bone marrow or organ transplantation. An experimental model was developed in which patients infected EBV-B cells are inoculated into scid mice and develop into tumors, allowing evaluation of treatment efficacy: monoclonal antibodies directed to membrane antigens of tumoral cells (monoclonal antibodies anti-B), monoclonal antibodies neutralizing interleukins (and especially IL6), cytotoxic T cells. Results obtained with these three different approaches are herein reported.     

Rating group therapist interventions: The validation of the Group Psychotherapy Intervention Rating Scale.

The present study seeks to establish the validity of the Group Psychotherapy Intervention Rating Scale (GPIRS), an observer-rated measure of the quality of group leader interventions. Concurrent validity was tested by comparing GPIRS results to 2 group gold standard process measures, the Hill Interaction Matrix and the Group Climate Questionnaire. Significant correlations between leader intervention scores and group member perceptions of group climate, as well as verbal interaction scores, were found. In addition, results indicated correlations between interventions aimed to gain balance between confrontation and warmth and member-rated levels of cohesion. Results lend support for the concurrent validity of the GPIRS. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression: Reliability and validity of judgments of novice raters.

Reliability studies of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) in therapy-outcome research require at least 2 clinicians. The present authors hypothesized that a less costly alternative, such as using trained undergraduates as 2nd raters, would produce results comparable to the use of 2 clinicians. Four expert raters provided criterion ratings for the HRSD on 20 depressed women. Three trained undergraduates rated the same Ss. The expert and student raters both made reliable ratings on the HRSD. Estimates of criterion validity for the student raters were also in the satisfactory range. (9 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Development of the Crisis Call Outcome Rating Scale.

We constructed a rating scale of caller behavior to be used as an outcome measure at a telephone hotline facility. Hotline volunteers supplied an initial pool of critical incidents, which described caller behavior that suggested whether or not a successful outcome had occurred. Psychology students used an initial version of the Crisis Call Outcome Rating Scale ({ccors}) to rate caller behavior on role-played audiotapes. Items that demonstrated respectable item–total correlations were retained for the final 26-item version of the {ccors}, which had an alpha coefficient of .95 and detected meaningful differences among audiotapes as indicated by analyses of variance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Development and validation of revisions in the Counselor Rating Form.

A Counselor Rating Form–Short Version (CRF-S) was developed and tested with 133 undergraduates in a replication of A. Bank and M. B. LaCrosse's (1975) procedure and with 155 clients receiving outpatient treatment. Results indicate that the reliabilities of scales in the CRF-S were comparable to those for the longer CRF. Factor analytic comparison of 5 theoretical models showed that the structure of ratings was best explained by 3 correlated factors corresponding to the Attractiveness, Expertness and Trustworthiness scales. Mediating effects for client individual and treatment differences were also revealed. (23 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Development and validation of the State Hope Scale.

Defining hope as a cognitive set comprising agency (belief in one's capacity to initiate and sustain actions) and pathways(belief in one's capacity to generate routes)to reach goals, the Hope Scale was developed and validated previously as a dispositional self-report measure of hope ( C. R. Snyder et al, see record 1991-17270-001). The present 4 studies were designed to develop and validate a measure of state hope. The 6-item State Hope Scale is internally consistent and reflects the theorized agency and pathways components. The relationships of the State Hope Scale to other measures demonstrate concurrent and discriminant validity; moreover, the scale is responsive to events in the lives of people as evidenced by data gathered through both correlational and causal designs. The State Hope Scale offers a brief, internally consistent, and valid self-report measure of ongoing goal-directed thinking that may be useful to researchers and applied professionals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Development and validation of the Ostomy Adjustment Scale.

Describes the development of the Ostomy Adjustment Scale, which is designed to measure psychological adjustment to ostomy surgery. 53 19–83 yr old ostomy patients responded to a mail questionnaire used for development of the scale; 30 of these Ss also completed a retest approximately 1 mo later. A 34-item scale comprised of items to be responded to on a 6-point Likert scale was developed. The scale was found to be reliable, and discriminant validity from measures of self-esteem and social desirability was demonstrated. Scores on the scale were related to time since surgery, return to work, and the amount of choice and preparation given Ss regarding the surgery. The scale also discriminated between these Ss and 31 undergraduates asked to simulate ostomy patients' responses. Factor analysis of the scale and the development of 2 short forms are also discussed. It is concluded that the scale will be useful in clinical practice with ostomates and in further research on adjustment to ostomy surgery. (12 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Counselor Rating Form—Short version: Further validation and comparison to the long form.

Initial validation data on the Counselor Rating Form—Short Version (CRF—S; J. D. Corrigan and L. D. Schmidt; see record 1983-09385-001), a revised version of the Counselor Rating Form (CRF; A. Barak and M. B. LaCrosse; see record 1976-07806-001), were positive. The present study, with 215 college students, largely replicated the methodology, and simultaneous collection of data on the CRF and the CRF—S allowed for direct comparisons between the 2 instruments. Results generally add to the validation of the CRF—S, but it was not successful in facilitating greater use of the lower end of the 7-point rating scale. Differences in counselor ratings suggest that the 2 instruments might be measuring slightly different constructs. (8 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory: Development and validation of a short version.

This article reports on the development of a revised version of the Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory (OCI; E. B. Foa, M. J. Kozak, P. Salkovskis, M. E. Coles, & N. Amir, 1998), a psychometrically sound, theoretically driven, self-report measure. The revised OCI (OCI-R) improves on the parent version in 3 ways: It eliminates the redundant frequency scale, simplifies the scoring of the subscales, and reduces overlap across subscales. The reliability and validity of the OCI-R were examined in 215 patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), 243 patients with other anxiety disorders, and 677 nonanxious individuals. The OCI-R, which contains 18 items and 6 subscales, has retained excellent psychometric properties. The OCI-R and its subscales differentiated well between individuals with and without OCD. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses demonstrated the usefulness of the OCI-R as a diagnostic tool for screening patients with OCD, utilizing empirically derived cutscores. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Identifying comorbid depression in elderly medical patients: Use of the Extracted Hamilton Depression Rating Scale.

The high prevalence and low rate of detection of comorbid depression in primary care is now well documented. Older adults with multiple medical problems represent a population at higher risk for underrecognition. The Extracted Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (XHDRS) was evaluated as a screening instrument for depression diagnosed according to Research Diagnostic Criteria in a sample of 150 geriatric medical and surgical inpatients. Scale reliability and validity were evaluated, and its sensitivity, specificity, and predictive power were calculated at multiple cutoff points. Results indicated good internal consistency, interrater reliability, concurrent validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Additionally, use of the XHDRS offered greatly improved case identification when compared with use of conventional screening procedures. The XHDRS also showed improved specificity and positive predictive power when compared with several widely used self-report symptom scales. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Development and validation of a modified version of the Peritraumatic Dissociative Experiences Questionnaire.

This article reports results from 3 studies conducted to develop and validate a modified version of the self-administered form of the Peritraumatic Dissociative Experiences Questionnaire (PDEQ; C. R. Marmar, D. S. Weiss, & T. J. Metzler, 1997). The objective was to develop an instrument suitable for use with persons from diverse ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds. In Study 1, the original PDEQ was administered to a small sample (N=15) recruited from among men admitted to the hospital for physical injuries stemming from exposure to community violence. Results led to modifications aimed at improving the utility of the instrument. In Study 2, the modified PDEQ was subjected to structural equation modeling and item response theory analyses to assess its psychometric properties in a larger, primarily male, sample of community violence survivors (N=294). In Study 3, the reliability and validity of the modified instrument were further assessed in a sample of female survivors of sexual assault (N=90). Results attest to the psychometric properties as well as the reliability and validity of the modified 8-item PDEQ. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Examining symptom expression as a function of symptom severity: Item performance on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression.

Despite widespread use of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD, M. Hamilton, 1960), questions have been raised concerning its psychometric properties. A nonparametric item response model was used to examine how the probability of observing a specific symptom of depression changes with increases in depressive severity in a sample of depressed adults. Results showed that options from a number of items on the HRSD did not vary as a function of severity and therefore should not be viewed as indicators of depressive severity. The extent to which symptoms are expressed as a function of depressive severity carries important implications for the use of the HRSD as a measure of severity and for the debate concerning construction of depression as a continuum. Results argue against viewing depression as a simple continuum. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Performance of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale in depressed patients in the United Arab Emirates

Cross-cultural variation in the frequencies and modes of expression of depressive symptoms may influence the validity of depression rating scales. The most widely used instrument for this purpose, namely Hamilton's Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), has not been systematically evaluated in Arab countries. This study evaluates the face validity of the HDRS-21 by studying symptom frequencies, factor structure and symptom clusters in 100 UAE depressed patients. Concurrent validity is tested by comparing total HDRS scores with global estimates of severity made by clinicians, admission status, impairment of social and occupational functioning, and the endogenicity score of the Newcastle (NC) Diagnostic Index. Total HDRS scores show highly significant agreement with three independent measures of severity of depression. Rank orders of the most and least frequent symptoms are consistent with studies of similar design. Marked differences lie in more retardation and somatization and fewer cognitive components in the present study. Principal-component analysis confirmed the heterogeneous structure of the scale, separating a group of core depressive symptoms, and endogenous, somatization, anxiety and psychotic symptom components. The internal consistency (reliability) of the whole scale is moderate, and improves in the core symptom factor. The main conclusion is that the HDRS is sensitive to severity of depression in the UAE culture. However, it measures heterogeneous aspects, and its internal consistency suffers as a result. High levels of retardation and somatization contribute significantly to the total score in socially developing communities.     

Assessment depression in primary care practice with the Beck Depression Inventory and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression.

Individuals suffering from depression seek help as frequently in the primary care setting as in psychiatric facilities. As primary care physicians increasingly provide such treatments, they will need to assess a patient's clinical status before, during, and after treatment. The authors evaluated the concordance and factor structures of 2 widely used depression inventories, the Beck Depression Inventory and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, in a sample of primary care patients participating in a randomized, control trial of treatments for major depression. The 2 scales were significantly correlated and assessed similar rates of improvement at multiple assessment points. Factor analyses indicated that despite their equivalent assessment of severity of depression, the 2 instruments emphasize different dimensions of depression. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Development and validation of the Wisconsin Smoking Withdrawal Scale.

The accurate assessment of nicotine withdrawal is important theoretically and clinically. A 28-item scale, the Wisconsin Smoking Withdrawal Scale, was developed that contains 7 reliable subscales tapping the major symptom elements of the nicotine withdrawal syndrome. Coefficients alpha for the subscales range from .75 to .93. This scale is sensitive to smoking withdrawal, is predictive of smoking cessation outcomes, and yields data that conform to a 7-factor structure. The 7 scales predicted intratreatment smoking, X2 (7, N?=?163)?=?15.19, p?=?.034. Moreover, the questionnaire is sufficiently brief so that it can be used in both clinical and research contexts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Computer-Assisted Hypnosis Scale: Standardization and norming of a computer-administered measure of hypnotic ability.

In a counterbalanced, within-subjects, repeated measures design, 130 participants were administered both the Computer-Assisted Hypnosis Scale (CAHS; C. D. Grant, 1993) and the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C (SHSS:C; A. M. Weitzenhoffer & E. R. Hilgard, 1962). For each hypnotic procedure, responsiveness was assessed along three dimensions: behavioral (CAHS, SHSS:C), subjective depth (Field Depth Inventory; P. B. Field, 1965), and relational involvement (Archaic Involvement Measure; M. R. Nash & D. Spinler, 1989). The CAHS was shown to be a psychometrically sound instrument for measuring hypnotic ability. The various dimensions of CAHS hypnotic responsiveness were highly positively related, and the CAHS compared favorably with the SHSS:C across the three dimensions assessed. Results are discussed in terms of the theory and practice of clinical assessment, noting directions for future research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)