Early improvement in HAMD-17 and HAMD-6 scores predicts ultimate response and remission for depressed patients treated with fluoxetine or ECT
Abstract
Background HAMD-6 is derived from the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17).We explore whether HAMD-6 is a reliable, valid, and sensitive to change measure, and whether early improvement using HAMD-6 can predict ultimate response/remission for inpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) receiving either fluoxetine or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT).Methods Data were from 2 trials for 126 MDD inpatients receiving fluoxetine, and 116 inpatients receiving ECT. Internal consistency, validity, and sensitivity to change using HAMD-17 and HAMD-6 at each assessment were examined and compared. Early improvement was defined as an at least 20% reduction of HAMD-17 or HAMD-6 scores at week 2 for patients receiving fluoxetine, or after 6 treatments for patients receiving ECT. Response was defined as ≥ 50% HAMD-17 score improvement from baseline, and remission was defined as a total HAMD-17 score of ≤ 7 at endpoint. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine which rating scale had better discriminative capacity.Results HAMD-6 is a reliable, valid, and sensitive to change measure. Early improvement using HAMD-6 had comparable predictive values with that of HAMD-17 for response/remission for patients receiving either fluoxetine or ECT.Limitations Samples were taken from 2 open-label trials with limited sample sizes.Conclusions HAMD-6 is a clinically useful measure. Those patients without early improvement, however, have a minimal chance of reaching ultimate response/remission, regardless of whether HAMD-17 or HAMD-6 was use.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) assesses depression with a cut-off value of 7 points.
“The Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) [15] was used to evaluate depression. A score below 7 indicates that the patient does not have depression, while a score over 7 indicates that the patient has depression”
From Mindfulness intervention, homogeneous medical concept, and concentrated solution nursing for colorectal cancer patients: a retrospective study (2024) · cites this paper as [15]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 39 · Cited by 45
- Authors
- Lin, H.-S., & Lin, C.-H.
- Affiliations
- Fooyin University (TW)
- Kaohsiung Medical University (TW)
- Corresponding author
- Lin, Ching-Hua
- ORCID
- Lin, Ching-Hua
- Venue
- Journal of Affective Disorders
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-02
- Volume
- 245
- Pages
- 91-97
- ISSN
- 0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2895789699
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 1.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Kaohsiung Municipal Kai-Syuan Psychiatric Hospital (KSPH-2007-16, KSPH-2008-12)
- Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST-103-2314-B-280-001-MY3)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, major depressive disorder, fluoxetine, electroconvulsive therapy, treatment response prediction, remission, early treatment response, inpatient depression
- MeSH terms
- Sadness, Adult, Major Depressive Disorder, Electroconvulsive Therapy, Female, Fluoxetine, Humans, Inpatients, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, ROC Curve, Reproducibility of Results, Treatment Outcome, Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation
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