Clarification of the cut-off score for Zung's self-rating depression scale

Debra A Dunstan, Ned Scott, Debra A Dunstan, Ned Scott

Abstract

Background: Zung's Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) is an established norm-referenced screening measure used to identify the presence of depressive disorders in adults. Despite widespread usage, issues exist concerning the recommended cut-off score for a positive diagnosis. First, confusion arising from the conversion of raw scores to index scores had resulted in a considerably higher cut-off score than that recommended being used by many researchers. Second, research in China [Chin J Nervous Mental Dis. 12:267-268; 2009] and Australia [BMC Psychiatry. 17:329; 2017] had suggested that the current recommended cut-off is lower than ideal, at least in those countries.

Method: To explore these matters further, sensitivity and specificity figures for alternative cut-off points were examined in positive clinical and negative community samples respectively. The positive clinical sample (n = 57) consisted of adults receiving treatment from a medical professional for some kind of depressive disorder, whose diagnosis was positively confirmed using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). The negative community sample (n = 172) was derived from a representative sample of adults whose absence of any depressive disorder was similarly confirmed by the PHQ.

Results: Mathematical models, including Youden's Index and the Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve, suggest that the recommended cut-off (a raw score of 40) is indeed too low. More detailed comparisons, including consideration of the likely numbers of false positives and negatives given prevalence rates, confirm that, ironically, the incorrect SDS cut-off score mistakenly applied by many researchers (a raw score of 50) would appear to provide far greater accuracy.

Conclusions: Research in China [Chin J Nervous Mental Dis. 12:267-268; 2009] has resulted in an elevated SDS cut-off score of 42 being used in many Chinese studies. Research by Dunstan and Scott [BMC Psychiatry. 17:329; 2017] in an Australian context, suggested that a greater increase, to a raw score of 44 might be required. Based on this study, an even larger adjustment is required. Specifically, we recommend the use of an SDS raw score of 50 as the cut-off point for clinical significance.

Keywords: Cut-off score; Depression screening; Zung self-rating depression scale (SDS).

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The ROC curve (blue line) for a perfectly discriminating test. Whatever cut-off point is chosen, either sensitivity or specificity = 1, hence the ROC curve in such a case consists of two straight lines. The dotted black line represents the points where sensitivity and specificity are equal
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The ROC curve (blue line) obtained for the combination of the Positive Clinical and Negative Community samples. For each possible SDS cut-off point, the sensitivity of the SDS amongst the Positive Clinical subsample is graphed against 1- the specificity recorded amongst the Negative Community subsample

References

    1. American Psychiatric Association . Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013.
    1. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JBW. Patient health Questionaire primary study group. Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ primary care study. JAMA. 1999;282:1737–1744. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.18.1737.
    1. Sharma B, Jain R. Right choice of a method for determination of cut-off values: a statistical tool for a diagnostic test. Asian J Med Sci. 2014;5(3):30–34. doi: 10.3126/ajms.v5i3.9296.
    1. Zung WWK. A self-rating depression scale. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1965;12(1):63–70. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1965.01720310065008.
    1. Zung WWK. From art to science: the diagnosis and treatment of depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1973;29(3):328–337. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1973.04200030026004.
    1. Dunstan DA, Scott N. Assigning clinical significance and symptom severity using the Zung scales: levels of misclassification arising from confusion between index and raw scores. Depress Res Treat. 2018:9250972.
    1. Wang CF, Cai ZH, Xu Q. Evaluation analysis of self-rating disorder scale in 1,340 people. Chin J Nervous Mental Dis. 2009;12:267–268.
    1. Lei M, Li C, Xiao X, Qiu J, Dai Y, Zhang Q. Evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the resilience scale in Wenchuan earthquake survivors. Compr Psychiatry. 2012;53(5):616–622. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2011.08.007.
    1. Feng Q, Q-l Z, Du Y, Ye Y-l, He Q-q. Associations of physical activity, screen time with depression, anxiety and sleep quality among chinese college freshmen. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e100914. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100914.
    1. Dunstan DA, Scott N, Todd AK. Screening for anxiety and depression: reassessing the utility of the Zung scales. BMC Psychiatry. 2017;17:329. doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1489-6.
    1. Habibzadeh F, Habibzadeh P, Yadollahie M. On determining the most appropriate test cut-off value: the case of tests with continuous results. Biochem Medica. 2016;26:297–307. doi: 10.11613/BM.2016.034.
    1. Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer. 1950;3(1):32–35. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::AID-CNCR2820030106>;2-3.
    1. Searle SR. Linear models. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1971.
    1. Akobang AK. Understanding diagnostic tests 3: receiver operating characteristic curves. Acta Paediatr. 2007;96:644–647. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2006.00178.x.
    1. Leeflang MMG, Moons KGM, Reitsma JB, Zwinderman AH. Bias in sensitivity and specificity caused by data-driven selection of optimal cutoff values: mechanisms, magnitude, and solutions. Clin Chem. 2008;54:729–737. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2007.096032.
    1. Zung WWK. How normal is depression? Psychometrics. 1972;13:174–178. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(72)71431-0.
    1. Deforge BR, Sobal J. Self-report depression scales in the elderly: the relationship between the CES-D and Zung. Int J Psychiatry Med. 1989;18(4):325–338. doi: 10.2190/8XGR-YUFH-0GVM-K4XB.
    1. Knight RG, Waal-Manning HJ, Spears GF. Some norms and reliability data for the state-trait anxiety inventory and the Zung self-rating depression scale. Br J Clin Psychol. 1983;22(4):245–249. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8260.1983.tb00610.x.
    1. Tanaka-Matsumi J, Kameoka VA. Reliabilities and concurrent validities of popular self-report measures of depression, anxiety, and social desirability. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1986;54(3):328. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.54.3.328.
    1. Carroll BJ, Fielding JM, Blashki TG. Depression rating scales: a critical review. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1973;28(3):361–366. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1973.01750330049009.
    1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th ed. Revised. Washington: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.
    1. Ridge SE, Vizard AL. Determination of the optimal cutoff value for a serological assay: an example using the Johne’s absorbed EIA. J Clin Microbiol. 1993;31:1256–1261.
    1. Australian Bureau of Statistics . National Survey of mental health and wellbeing: summary of results, Australia, 2007. 2008.
    1. Lovibond PF, Lovibond SH. The structure of negative emotional states: comparison of the depression anxiety stress scales (DASS) with the Beck depression and anxiety inventories. Behav Res Ther. 1995;33:335–343. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U.
    1. Nieuwhenuijsen K, de Boer AGEM, Verbeek JHAM, Blonk RWB, van Dijk FJH. The depression anxiety stress scales (DASS): detecting anxiety disorder and depression in employees absent from work because of mental health problems. Occup Environ Med. 2003;60:i77–i82. doi: 10.1136/oem.60.suppl_1.i77.
    1. Tran TD, Tran T, Fisher J. Validation of the depression anxiety stress scales (DASS) 21 as a screening instrument for depression and anxiety in a rural community-based cohort of northern Vietnamese women. BMC Psychiatry. 2013;13:24. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-13-24.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner