Cited by 90Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingTreatment of Major Depression

Self- and clinician-rated montgomery-asberg depression rating scale: evaluation in clinical practice

Open access
Bondolfi, G., Jermann, F., Rouget, B. Weber, Gex-Fabry, M., McQuillan, A., Dupont-Willemin, A., Aubry, J.-M., Nguyen, C.·2010·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background Time- and cost-effective self-rating scales of depressive symptoms are particularly valuable for frequent use in large-scale effectiveness trials. The aim of the present study was to examine the psychometric properties of the French version of the self-rated Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS-S) and determine whether it might complement the MADRS in monitoring depression severity and change over time in routine clinical practice.Methods Sixty-three adult outpatients with a current depressive episode completed the MADRS-S and were interviewed with the MADRS on two occasions, within a 1-month interval.Results All patients readily accepted the MADRS-S. It showed good to excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.85 at Time 1; 0.94 at Time 2). Its factor structure revealed that a single component explained a large proportion of variability (47.0% at Time 1; 68.8% at Time 2). Concurrent validity of the self- and clinician-rated versions was good (Pearson's correlation coefficients for total scores 0.81 at Time 1; 0.91 at Time 2). The MADRS-S was sensitive to change over the 4-week observation period (correlation of 0.71 between change scores on self- and clinician-rated instruments).Limitations Generalizability is restricted to outpatients with moderate to severe depression, and the MADRS-S ability to measure treatment effects needs to be examined.Conclusions The present study indicates that the MADRS-S displays favourable psychometric properties and suggests that it might be a valid complement to the MADRS, both in research settings and clinical practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2009.06.037

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Bondolfi, G., Jermann, F., Rouget, B. W., Gex-Fabry, M., McQuillan, A., Dupont-Willemin, A., Aubry, J.-M., & Nguyen, C.
Affiliations
University Hospital of Geneva (CH)
Corresponding author
Bondolfi, G.
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-03
Volume
121
Issue
3
Pages
268-272
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2038282058
Cited by
90
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
5.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, French adaptation, psychometric properties, internal consistency, factor structure, concurrent validity, sensitivity to change, depression severity assessment, clinical practice
MeSH terms
Adult, Bipolar Disorder, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Depressive Disorder, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Assessment, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics, Psychotic Disorders, Switzerland, 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