Clinical validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) against independent global severity ratings in older adults
According to a recent study, ratings on the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) obtained via a dedicated semi-structured interview are valid measures of the severity of psychotic depression. This study aimed to further test the validity, scalability and responsiveness of the PDAS in older a...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Acta neuropsychiatrica 2018-08, Vol.30 (4), p.203-208 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 208 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 203 |
| container_title | Acta neuropsychiatrica |
| container_volume | 30 |
| creator | Vermeulen, Tom Lemey, Lieve Van Diermen, Linda Schrijvers, Didier Madani, Yamina Sabbe, Bernard Van Den Bossche, Maarten J.A. van der Mast, Roos C. Østergaard, Søren D. |
| description | According to a recent study, ratings on the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) obtained via a dedicated semi-structured interview are valid measures of the severity of psychotic depression. This study aimed to further test the validity, scalability and responsiveness of the PDAS in older adults using independent ratings on the Clinical Global Impression Scale - Severity (CGI-S) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) as references.
Ratings were performed at admission and discharge at two old age psychiatric wards in Flanders, Belgium. In total, 62 older adults (mean age: 74.3 years) with psychotic depression were included. The PDAS was rated by trained nurses using the semi-structured PDAS interview. Senior psychiatrists scored the participants on the CGI-S. Psychologists or experienced nurses rated participants on the MADRS. Clinical validity was assessed by correlating the PDAS total scores with CGI-S ratings and MADRS total scores. Mokken analysis was performed to assess the scalability of the PDAS. Responsiveness was assessed by comparing the proportion of participants in remission (PDAS total score |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1017/neu.2018.2 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2010837585</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_neu_2018_2</cupid><sourcerecordid>2788670953</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-efad0dbf008d2e1ab0ee63edeb3ef593925ea2714c2a1f679bb181c8317898153</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkVFLHDEQx0Op6NX60g9QAn2x4l4nWXPJPh5nrQWhgvV5yW5mz0g2uSZZ4Z794s3h2ULpy2Qgv_xmyJ-QDwzmDJj84nGac2Bqzt-QGVsAqwRn4i2ZQcMvKi5BHZF3KT1CgRvgh-SINwIYSDEjzytnve21o0_aWaOzDZ6GgeYHpLdp2z-EbHt6iZuIKe3ulimVbkSf6V15hvT09nJ595nqtbY-ZWq9wQ2WUoC1C10xJ3zCaPOWxqL361QYGpzBSLWZXE7vycGgXcKT_XlM7q--_lxdVzc_vn1fLW-qvhY8VzhoA6YbAJThyHQHiIsaDXY1DqKpGy5Qc8kueq7ZsJBN1zHFelUzqRrFRH1MTl-8mxh-TZhyO9rUo3PaY5hSW_4QVC2F2qGf_kEfwxR92a7lUqmFhEbUhTp7ofoYUoo4tJtoRx23LYN2F01botlpVcsL_HGvnLoRzR_0NYsCnO9teuyiNWv8O_Q_vt_U7Zmy</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2788670953</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clinical validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) against independent global severity ratings in older adults</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Vermeulen, Tom ; Lemey, Lieve ; Van Diermen, Linda ; Schrijvers, Didier ; Madani, Yamina ; Sabbe, Bernard ; Van Den Bossche, Maarten J.A. ; van der Mast, Roos C. ; Østergaard, Søren D.</creator><creatorcontrib>Vermeulen, Tom ; Lemey, Lieve ; Van Diermen, Linda ; Schrijvers, Didier ; Madani, Yamina ; Sabbe, Bernard ; Van Den Bossche, Maarten J.A. ; van der Mast, Roos C. ; Østergaard, Søren D.</creatorcontrib><description>According to a recent study, ratings on the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) obtained via a dedicated semi-structured interview are valid measures of the severity of psychotic depression. This study aimed to further test the validity, scalability and responsiveness of the PDAS in older adults using independent ratings on the Clinical Global Impression Scale - Severity (CGI-S) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) as references.
Ratings were performed at admission and discharge at two old age psychiatric wards in Flanders, Belgium. In total, 62 older adults (mean age: 74.3 years) with psychotic depression were included. The PDAS was rated by trained nurses using the semi-structured PDAS interview. Senior psychiatrists scored the participants on the CGI-S. Psychologists or experienced nurses rated participants on the MADRS. Clinical validity was assessed by correlating the PDAS total scores with CGI-S ratings and MADRS total scores. Mokken analysis was performed to assess the scalability of the PDAS. Responsiveness was assessed by comparing the proportion of participants in remission (PDAS total score <8 at study baseline and endpoint).
The Spearman correlation coefficients were 0.76 and 0.79 for the PDAS versus CGI-S and PDAS versus MADRS, respectively. The Mokken analysis yielded a Loevinger coefficient of 0.46, which is indicative of scalability. At admission, no participants met the PDAS remission criterion. At discharge, 54% (95% confidence interval: 47%-60%) of the patients met this criterion.
The PDAS appears to be a clinically valid, scalable and responsive measure of the severity of psychotic depression in older adults.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0924-2708</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1601-5215</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/neu.2018.2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29501075</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Clinical medicine ; Depressive Disorder - diagnosis ; Drug abuse ; Female ; Humans ; Illnesses ; Male ; Mental depression ; Middle Aged ; Older people ; Original Article ; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales ; Psychometrics ; Psychosis ; Psychotic Disorders - diagnosis ; Ratings & rankings ; Remission (Medicine) ; Reproducibility of Results ; Severity of Illness Index ; Validity</subject><ispartof>Acta neuropsychiatrica, 2018-08, Vol.30 (4), p.203-208</ispartof><rights>Scandinavian College of Neuropsychopharmacology 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-efad0dbf008d2e1ab0ee63edeb3ef593925ea2714c2a1f679bb181c8317898153</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-efad0dbf008d2e1ab0ee63edeb3ef593925ea2714c2a1f679bb181c8317898153</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4240-0155</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0924270818000029/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,315,781,785,27929,27930,55633</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29501075$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Vermeulen, Tom</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lemey, Lieve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Diermen, Linda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schrijvers, Didier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Madani, Yamina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sabbe, Bernard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Den Bossche, Maarten J.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Mast, Roos C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Østergaard, Søren D.</creatorcontrib><title>Clinical validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) against independent global severity ratings in older adults</title><title>Acta neuropsychiatrica</title><addtitle>Acta Neuropsychiatr</addtitle><description>According to a recent study, ratings on the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) obtained via a dedicated semi-structured interview are valid measures of the severity of psychotic depression. This study aimed to further test the validity, scalability and responsiveness of the PDAS in older adults using independent ratings on the Clinical Global Impression Scale - Severity (CGI-S) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) as references.
Ratings were performed at admission and discharge at two old age psychiatric wards in Flanders, Belgium. In total, 62 older adults (mean age: 74.3 years) with psychotic depression were included. The PDAS was rated by trained nurses using the semi-structured PDAS interview. Senior psychiatrists scored the participants on the CGI-S. Psychologists or experienced nurses rated participants on the MADRS. Clinical validity was assessed by correlating the PDAS total scores with CGI-S ratings and MADRS total scores. Mokken analysis was performed to assess the scalability of the PDAS. Responsiveness was assessed by comparing the proportion of participants in remission (PDAS total score <8 at study baseline and endpoint).
The Spearman correlation coefficients were 0.76 and 0.79 for the PDAS versus CGI-S and PDAS versus MADRS, respectively. The Mokken analysis yielded a Loevinger coefficient of 0.46, which is indicative of scalability. At admission, no participants met the PDAS remission criterion. At discharge, 54% (95% confidence interval: 47%-60%) of the patients met this criterion.
The PDAS appears to be a clinically valid, scalable and responsive measure of the severity of psychotic depression in older adults.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Depressive Disorder - diagnosis</subject><subject>Drug abuse</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Illnesses</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mental depression</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Older people</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Psychosis</subject><subject>Psychotic Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Ratings & rankings</subject><subject>Remission (Medicine)</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>0924-2708</issn><issn>1601-5215</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNptkVFLHDEQx0Op6NX60g9QAn2x4l4nWXPJPh5nrQWhgvV5yW5mz0g2uSZZ4Z794s3h2ULpy2Qgv_xmyJ-QDwzmDJj84nGac2Bqzt-QGVsAqwRn4i2ZQcMvKi5BHZF3KT1CgRvgh-SINwIYSDEjzytnve21o0_aWaOzDZ6GgeYHpLdp2z-EbHt6iZuIKe3ulimVbkSf6V15hvT09nJ595nqtbY-ZWq9wQ2WUoC1C10xJ3zCaPOWxqL361QYGpzBSLWZXE7vycGgXcKT_XlM7q--_lxdVzc_vn1fLW-qvhY8VzhoA6YbAJThyHQHiIsaDXY1DqKpGy5Qc8kueq7ZsJBN1zHFelUzqRrFRH1MTl-8mxh-TZhyO9rUo3PaY5hSW_4QVC2F2qGf_kEfwxR92a7lUqmFhEbUhTp7ofoYUoo4tJtoRx23LYN2F01botlpVcsL_HGvnLoRzR_0NYsCnO9teuyiNWv8O_Q_vt_U7Zmy</recordid><startdate>201808</startdate><enddate>201808</enddate><creator>Vermeulen, Tom</creator><creator>Lemey, Lieve</creator><creator>Van Diermen, Linda</creator><creator>Schrijvers, Didier</creator><creator>Madani, Yamina</creator><creator>Sabbe, Bernard</creator><creator>Van Den Bossche, Maarten J.A.</creator><creator>van der Mast, Roos C.</creator><creator>Østergaard, Søren D.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4240-0155</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201808</creationdate><title>Clinical validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) against independent global severity ratings in older adults</title><author>Vermeulen, Tom ; Lemey, Lieve ; Van Diermen, Linda ; Schrijvers, Didier ; Madani, Yamina ; Sabbe, Bernard ; Van Den Bossche, Maarten J.A. ; van der Mast, Roos C. ; Østergaard, Søren D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c352t-efad0dbf008d2e1ab0ee63edeb3ef593925ea2714c2a1f679bb181c8317898153</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Depressive Disorder - diagnosis</topic><topic>Drug abuse</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Illnesses</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mental depression</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Older people</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Psychosis</topic><topic>Psychotic Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Ratings & rankings</topic><topic>Remission (Medicine)</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vermeulen, Tom</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lemey, Lieve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Diermen, Linda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schrijvers, Didier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Madani, Yamina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sabbe, Bernard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Den Bossche, Maarten J.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Mast, Roos C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Østergaard, Søren D.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta neuropsychiatrica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vermeulen, Tom</au><au>Lemey, Lieve</au><au>Van Diermen, Linda</au><au>Schrijvers, Didier</au><au>Madani, Yamina</au><au>Sabbe, Bernard</au><au>Van Den Bossche, Maarten J.A.</au><au>van der Mast, Roos C.</au><au>Østergaard, Søren D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clinical validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) against independent global severity ratings in older adults</atitle><jtitle>Acta neuropsychiatrica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Neuropsychiatr</addtitle><date>2018-08</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>203</spage><epage>208</epage><pages>203-208</pages><issn>0924-2708</issn><eissn>1601-5215</eissn><abstract>According to a recent study, ratings on the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) obtained via a dedicated semi-structured interview are valid measures of the severity of psychotic depression. This study aimed to further test the validity, scalability and responsiveness of the PDAS in older adults using independent ratings on the Clinical Global Impression Scale - Severity (CGI-S) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) as references.
Ratings were performed at admission and discharge at two old age psychiatric wards in Flanders, Belgium. In total, 62 older adults (mean age: 74.3 years) with psychotic depression were included. The PDAS was rated by trained nurses using the semi-structured PDAS interview. Senior psychiatrists scored the participants on the CGI-S. Psychologists or experienced nurses rated participants on the MADRS. Clinical validity was assessed by correlating the PDAS total scores with CGI-S ratings and MADRS total scores. Mokken analysis was performed to assess the scalability of the PDAS. Responsiveness was assessed by comparing the proportion of participants in remission (PDAS total score <8 at study baseline and endpoint).
The Spearman correlation coefficients were 0.76 and 0.79 for the PDAS versus CGI-S and PDAS versus MADRS, respectively. The Mokken analysis yielded a Loevinger coefficient of 0.46, which is indicative of scalability. At admission, no participants met the PDAS remission criterion. At discharge, 54% (95% confidence interval: 47%-60%) of the patients met this criterion.
The PDAS appears to be a clinically valid, scalable and responsive measure of the severity of psychotic depression in older adults.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><pmid>29501075</pmid><doi>10.1017/neu.2018.2</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4240-0155</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0924-2708 |
| ispartof | Acta neuropsychiatrica, 2018-08, Vol.30 (4), p.203-208 |
| issn | 0924-2708 1601-5215 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2010837585 |
| source | MEDLINE; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
| subjects | Aged Aged, 80 and over Clinical medicine Depressive Disorder - diagnosis Drug abuse Female Humans Illnesses Male Mental depression Middle Aged Older people Original Article Psychiatric Status Rating Scales Psychometrics Psychosis Psychotic Disorders - diagnosis Ratings & rankings Remission (Medicine) Reproducibility of Results Severity of Illness Index Validity |
| title | Clinical validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) against independent global severity ratings in older adults |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-11T19%3A55%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical%20validation%20of%20the%20Psychotic%20Depression%20Assessment%20Scale%20(PDAS)%20against%20independent%20global%20severity%20ratings%20in%20older%20adults&rft.jtitle=Acta%20neuropsychiatrica&rft.au=Vermeulen,%20Tom&rft.date=2018-08&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=203&rft.epage=208&rft.pages=203-208&rft.issn=0924-2708&rft.eissn=1601-5215&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/neu.2018.2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2788670953%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2788670953&rft_id=info:pmid/29501075&rft_cupid=10_1017_neu_2018_2&rfr_iscdi=true |