Cited by 62Psychometric Methodologies and TestingAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale-second edition: a reliable and useful instrument

Osman, Augustine, Gutierrez, Peter M., Bagge, Courtney L., Fang, Qijuan, Emmerich, Ashley·2010·Journal of Clinical Psychology

Abstract

The authors conducted two studies to address issues of the dimensionality, scale reliability, and psychometric properties of scores on the Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale-Second Edition (RADS-2; Reynolds, 2002) in samples of adolescent psychiatric inpatients. In Study 1 (N=262), they used bifactor analysis to further evaluate the general and specific components of the RADS-2. In Study 2 (N=196), they used confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate the fit of a 1-factor model, the original 4-factor model, a second-order model, and a bifactor model to a new sample data. In both studies, the total RADS-2 and content-specific subscale scores showed acceptable estimates of reliability (i.e., scale reliability estimates >.80). Estimates of concurrent validity were also examined. Scores of the RADS-2 total and content-specific subscale scores were useful in differentiating between the responses of youth with mood disorder diagnoses and those with other primary psychiatric disorder diagnoses. The authors also conducted correlation analyses to identify potential correlates for the total RADS-2 scale and the proposed subscale scores.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jclp.20727

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Osman, A., Gutierrez, P. M., Bagge, C. L., Fang, Q., & Emmerich, A.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio (US)
  • Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Centers (US)
  • University of Mississippi Medical Center (US)
  • University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
Corresponding author
Osman, Augustine
Venue
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-08-16
Volume
66
Issue
12
Pages
1324-1345
ISSN
  • 0021-9762 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-4679
OpenAlex
W1963974984
Cited by
62
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
adolescent depression, psychometric properties, bifactor model, dimensionality, scale reliability, concurrent validity, mood disorders, psychiatric inpatients, subscale scores
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Depression, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review