Cited by 211Treatment of Major DepressionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

What does the HAMD mean?

Leucht, Stefan, Fennema, Hein, Engel, Rolf, Kaspers–Janssen, Marion, Lepping, Peter, Szegedi, Armin·2013·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Little is known about the clinical relevance of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17) total scores. It is unclear how total scores translate into clinical severity, or what commonly used measures for response (reduction from baseline of ≥ 50% in the total score) and remission (total HAMD-17 score ≤ 7) mean from a clinical perspective. We therefore compared: (a) the percentage and absolute change in the HAMD-17 total scores with Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I); (b) the absolute and percentage change in the HAMD-17 total scores with Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) absolute change; and (c) the percentage and absolute change in the HAMD-17 total scores with CGI-I in the subgroups of patients with ≤ median and > median HAMD-17 total scores at baseline. The method used was equipercentile linking of HAMD-17 and CGI ratings from 43 drug trials in patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) (n = 7131). Our results confirm the validity of the commonly used measures for remission and response in MDD trials: a CGI-I score of 2 ('much improved') corresponded to a reduction from baseline of > 50% and < 60%, and a CGI-I score of 1 ('very much improved') to a reduction of > 75% and < 85%. The CGI-S score of 1 ('normal., not at all ill') corresponded to the HAMD-17 total score of < 5 and the CGI-S score of 2 ('borderline mentally ill') to the score between 6 and 8. An effect of baseline illness severity was observed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2012.12.001

Cites

30 of 30 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

2 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Leucht, S., Fennema, H., Engel, R., Kaspers–Janssen, M., Lepping, P., & Szegedi, A.
Affiliations
  • TUM Klinikum (DE)
  • MSD (Netherlands) (NL)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board (GB)
  • Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) (US)
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-06
Volume
148
Issue
2-3
Pages
243-248
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977670030
Cited by
211
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9
FWCI
5.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • 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
Keywords
Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Clinical Global Impression Scale, CGI-I, CGI-S, major depressive disorder, depression severity, treatment response, remission, equipercentile linking, antidepressant trials
MeSH terms
Adult, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Severity of Illness Index, Reproducibility of Results, Treatment Outcome

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