CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,782Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesAging, Health, and DisabilityMental Health Treatment and Access

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 116 of the 116 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) as a screening instrument for depression among community-residing older adults.

Lewinsohn, Peter M., Seeley, John R., Roberts, Robert E., Allen, Nicholas B.·1997·Psychology and Aging
DOI 10.1037/0882-7974.12.2.277
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The efficacy of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) as a screener for clinical depression was examined in a sample of 1,005 community-residing adults (age range = 50-96). Presence of a depressive disorder was determined by diagnostic interview. Analyses revealed that neither age, gender, cognitive impairment, functional impairment, physical disease, nor social desirability had a significant negative effect on the psychometric properties or screening efficacy of the CES-D. These results indicate that there was no significant degradation in the ability of the CES-D to screen for depression among community-residing elderly adults. This conclusion must be tempered by the fact that the sample did not include participants with the more disabling forms of cognitive or functional impairment and physical illness.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0882-7974.12.2.277

Cites

116 of 116 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,782

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Lewinsohn, P. M., Seeley, J. R., Roberts, R. E., & Allen, N. B.
Affiliations
Oregon Research Institute (US)
ORCID
Venue
Psychology and Aging
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1997-06
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
277-287
ISSN
  • 0882-7974 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1498
DOI
10.1037/0882-7974.12.2.277
OpenAlex
W2093505519
Cited by
1,782
References
116
Citations by year
2026: 82 · 2025: 162 · 2024: 131 · 2023: 153 · 2022: 146 · 2021: 178 · 2020: 124 · 2019: 113 · 2018: 137 · 2017: 91 · 2016: 89 · 2015: 61 · 2014: 47 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 18
FWCI
13.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychology and Aging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01mh035672-05)
  • National Institute on Aging (AG1449)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH33572, MH 35672)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, depression screening, community-dwelling older adults, psychometric properties, screening efficacy, cognitive impairment, functional disability, physical illness, social desirability, age and gender effects
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Community Mental Health Services, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics

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