The Psychometric Properties of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale in Chinese Primary Care Patients: Factor Structure, Construct Validity, Reliability, Sensitivity and Responsiveness

Weng Yee Chin, Edmond P H Choi, Kit T Y Chan, Carlos K H Wong, Weng Yee Chin, Edmond P H Choi, Kit T Y Chan, Carlos K H Wong

Abstract

Background: The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) is a commonly used instrument to measure depressive symptomatology. Despite this, the evidence for its psychometric properties remains poorly established in Chinese populations. The aim of this study was to validate the use of the CES-D in Chinese primary care patients by examining factor structure, construct validity, reliability, sensitivity and responsiveness.

Methods and results: The psychometric properties were assessed amongst a sample of 3686 Chinese adult primary care patients in Hong Kong. Three competing factor structure models were examined using confirmatory factor analysis. The original CES-D four-structure model had adequate fit, however the data was better fit into a bi-factor model. For the internal construct validity, corrected item-total correlations were 0.4 for most items. The convergent validity was assessed by examining the correlations between the CES-D, the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) and the Short Form-12 Health Survey (version 2) Mental Component Summary (SF-12 v2 MCS). The CES-D had a strong correlation with the PHQ-9 (coefficient: 0.78) and SF-12 v2 MCS (coefficient: -0.75). Internal consistency was assessed by McDonald's omega hierarchical (ωH). The ωH value for the general depression factor was 0.855. The ωH values for "somatic", "depressed affect", "positive affect" and "interpersonal problems" were 0.434, 0.038, 0.738 and 0.730, respectively. For the two-week test-retest reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.91. The CES-D was sensitive in detecting differences between known groups, with the AUC >0.7. Internal responsiveness of the CES-D to detect positive and negative changes was satisfactory (with p value <0.01 and all effect size statistics >0.2). The CES-D was externally responsive, with the AUC>0.7.

Conclusions: The CES-D appears to be a valid, reliable, sensitive and responsive instrument for screening and monitoring depressive symptoms in adult Chinese primary care patients. In its original four-factor and bi-factor structure, the CES-D is supported for cross-cultural comparisons of depression in multi-center studies.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

    1. Gaynes BN, Burns BJ, Tweed DL, Erickson P. Depression and health-related quality of life. The Journal of nervous and mental disease. 2002;190(12):799–806.
    1. Shafer AB. Meta-analysis of the factor structures of four depression questionnaires: Beck, CES-D, Hamilton, and Zung. Journal of clinical psychology. 2006;62(1):123–46. 10.1002/jclp.20213 .
    1. Radloff LS. The CES-D scale a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied psychological measurement. 1977;1(3):385–401.
    1. Radloff LS. The use of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale in adolescents and young adults. Journal of youth and adolescence. 1991;20(2):149–66. 10.1007/BF01537606 .
    1. Rowan PJ, Haas D, Campbell JA, Maclean DR, Davidson KW. Depressive symptoms have an independent, gradient risk for coronary heart disease incidence in a random, population-based sample. Annals of epidemiology. 2005;15(4):316–20. 10.1016/j.annepidem.2004.08.006 .
    1. Callahan CM, Hui SL, Nienaber NA, Musick BS. Longitudinal study of depression and health services use among elderly primary care patients. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 1994.
    1. Katz MR, Kopek N, Waldron J, Devins GM, Tomlinson G. Screening for depression in head and neck cancer. Psycho-oncology. 2004;13(4):269–80. 10.1002/pon.734 .
    1. Pirraglia PA, Peterson JC, Williams Russo P, Gorkin L, Charlson ME. Depressive symptomatology in coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients. International journal of geriatric psychiatry. 1999;14(8):668–80.
    1. Ying YW. Depressive symptomatology among Chinese-Americans as measured by the CES-D. Journal of clinical psychology. 1988;44(5):739–46. .
    1. Chou K-L, Lee PW, Yu EC, Macfarlane D, Cheng Y-H, Chan SS, et al. Effect of Tai Chi on depressive symptoms amongst Chinese older patients with depressive disorders: a randomized clinical trial. International journal of geriatric psychiatry. 2004;19(11):1105–7.
    1. Lai G. Work and family roles and psychological well-being in urban China. Journal of health and social behavior. 1995;36(1):11–37. .
    1. Lin HC, Tang TC, Yen JY, Ko CH, Huang CF, Liu SC, et al. Depression and its association with self‐esteem, family, peer and school factors in a population of 9586 adolescents in southern Taiwan. Psychiatry and Clinical neurosciences. 2008;62(4):412–20. 10.1111/j.1440-1819.2008.01820.x
    1. Zhang J, Sun W, Kong Y, Wang C. Reliability and validity of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale in 2 special adult samples from rural China. Comprehensive psychiatry. 2012;53(8):1243–51. 10.1016/j.comppsych.2012.03.015
    1. Cheung CK, Bagley C. Validating an American scale in Hong Kong: the center for epidemiological stuides depression scale (CES-D). The Journal of Psychology. 1998;132(2):169–86.
    1. Lee SW, Stewart SM, Byrne BM, Wong JP, Ho SY, Lee PW, et al. Factor structure of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale in Hong Kong adolescents. Journal of personality assessment. 2008;90(2):175–84. 10.1080/00223890701845385 .
    1. Chi I, Boey K. Hong Kong validation of measuring instruments of mental health status of the elderly. Clinical Gerontologist. 1993;13(4):35–51.
    1. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, et al. Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value in health: the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. 2005;8(2):94–104. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x .
    1. Choi EP, Lam CL, Chin WY. Validation of the International Prostate Symptom Score in Chinese males and females with lower urinary tract symptoms. Health and quality of life outcomes. 2014;12:1 10.1186/1477-7525-12-1
    1. Gitlin LN, Belle SH, Burgio LD, Czaja SJ, Mahoney D, Gallagher-Thompson D, et al. Effect of multicomponent interventions on caregiver burden and depression: the REACH multisite initiative at 6-month follow-up. Psychol Aging. 2003;18(3):361–74. 10.1037/0882-7974.18.3.361
    1. Bakitas M, Lyons KD, Hegel MT, Balan S, Brokaw FC, Seville J, et al. Effects of a palliative care intervention on clinical outcomes in patients with advanced cancer: the Project ENABLE II randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2009;302(7):741–9. 10.1001/jama.2009.1198
    1. Revicki DA, Cella D, Hays RD, Sloan JA, Lenderking WR, Aaronson NK. Responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes. Health and quality of life outcomes. 2006;4:70 10.1186/1477-7525-4-70
    1. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2000;53(5):459–68. .
    1. Chin WY, Lam CL, Wong SY, Lo YY, Fong DY, Lam TP, et al. The epidemiology and natural history of depressive disorders in Hong Kong's primary care. BMC family practice. 2011;12(1):129.
    1. Wong J, Ho S, Lam T. Central and Western District Adolescent Health Survey 2002–03 full report Department of Community Medicine, University of Hong Kong; 2004.
    1. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. Journal of general internal medicine. 2001;16(9):606–13.
    1. Lowe B, Schenkel I, Carney-Doebbeling C, Gobel C. Responsiveness of the PHQ-9 to Psychopharmacological Depression Treatment. Psychosomatics. 2006;47(1):62–7. 10.1176/appi.psy.47.1.62 .
    1. Cheng C, Cheng M. To validate the Chinese version of the 2Q and PHQ-9 questionnaires in Hong Kong Chinese patients. The Hong Kong Practitioner. 2007;29(10):381.
    1. Yu X, Tam WW, Wong PT, Lam TH, Stewart SM. The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for measuring depressive symptoms among the general population in Hong Kong. Comprehensive psychiatry. 2012;53(1):95–102. 10.1016/j.comppsych.2010.11.002 .
    1. Ware J Jr., Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical care. 1996;34(3):220–33. .
    1. Lam ET, Lam CL, Fong DY, Huang WW. Is the SF-12 version 2 Health Survey a valid and equivalent substitute for the SF-36 version 2 Health Survey for the Chinese? Journal of evaluation in clinical practice. 2013;19(1):200–8. 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01800.x .
    1. Vilagut G, Forero CG, Pinto-Meza A, Haro JM, de Graaf R, Bruffaerts R, et al. The mental component of the short-form 12 health survey (SF-12) as a measure of depressive disorders in the general population: results with three alternative scoring methods. Value in health: the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. 2013;16(4):564–73. 10.1016/j.jval.2013.01.006 .
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2007;60(1):34–42. Epub 2006/12/13. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012 .
    1. Gomez R, McLaren S. The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale Support for a Bifactor Model With a Dominant General Factor and a Specific Factor for Positive Affect. Assessment. 2014:1073191114545357.
    1. Hu Lt, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal. 1999;6(1):1–55.
    1. Thompson B. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications: American Psychological Association; 2004.
    1. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M. Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods. 2008;6(1):53–60.
    1. Ware JE Jr., Gandek B. Methods for testing data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability: the IQOLA Project approach. International Quality of Life Assessment. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 1998;51(11):945–52. Epub 1998/11/17. .
    1. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143(1):29–36. 10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 .
    1. Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2008;61(2):102–9. Epub 2008/01/08. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012 .
    1. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. Journal of chronic diseases. 1987;40(2):171–8. .
    1. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G. Measuring change over time: Assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. Journal of Chronic Diseases. 1987;40(2):171–8. 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90069-5.
    1. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
    1. Liang MH, Fossel AH, Larson MG. Comparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation. Medical care. 1990;28(7):632–42.
    1. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2000;53(5):459–68.
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2007;60(1):34–42. Epub 2006/12/13. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012 .
    1. Canady RB, Stommel M, Holzman C. Measurement properties of the centers for epidemiological studies depression scale (CES-D) in a sample of African American and non-Hispanic White pregnant women. Journal of nursing measurement. 2009;17(2):91–104.
    1. Ruiz-Grosso P, de Mola CL, Vega-Dienstmaier JM, Arevalo JM, Chavez K, Vilela A, et al. Validation of the spanish center for epidemiological studies depression and zung self-rating depression scales: a comparative validation study. PloS one. 2012;7(10):e45413 10.1371/journal.pone.0045413
    1. Milette K, Hudson M, Baron M, Thombs BD, Canadian Scleroderma Research G. Comparison of the PHQ-9 and CES-D depression scales in systemic sclerosis: internal consistency reliability, convergent validity and clinical correlates. Rheumatology. 2010;49(4):789–96. 10.1093/rheumatology/kep443 .
    1. Ghubash R, Daradkeh TK, Al Naseri KS, Al Bloushi NB, Al Daheri AM. The performance of the Center for Epidemiologic Study Depression Scale (CES-D) in an Arab female community. The International journal of social psychiatry. 2000;46(4):241–9. .
    1. Miller WC, Anton HA, Townson AF. Measurement properties of the CESD scale among individuals with spinal cord injury. Spinal cord. 2008;46(4):287–92. 10.1038/sj.sc.3102127 .
    1. Wong CK, Lam CL, Law WL, Poon JT, Kwong DL, Tsang J, et al. Condition-specific measure was more responsive than generic measure in colorectal cancer: all but social domains. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2013;66(5):557–65. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.11.010 .
    1. Choi EP, Chin WY, Lam CL, Wan EY. The responsiveness of the International Prostate Symptom Score, Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 and Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. J Adv Nurs. 2015;71(8):1857–70. 10.1111/jan.12662 .

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere