CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 480Psychometric Methodologies and TestingAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Research Topics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 73 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Establishing a common metric for depressive symptoms: linking the BDI-II, CES-D, and PHQ-9 to PROMIS depression

Open access
Choi, Seung W., Schalet, Benjamin, Cook, Karon F., Cella, David·2014·Psychological Assessment
DOI 10.1037/a0035768PMC PMC5515387
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Interest in measuring patient-reported outcomes has increased dramatically in recent decades. This has simultaneously produced numerous assessment options and confusion. In the case of depressive symptoms, there are many commonly used options for measuring the same or a very similar concept. Public and professional reporting of scores can be confused by multiple scale ranges, normative levels, and clinical thresholds. A common reporting metric would have great value and can be achieved when similar instruments are administered to a single sample and then linked to each other to produce cross-walk score tables (e.g., Dorans, 2007; Kolen & Brennan, 2004). Using multiple procedures based on item response theory and equipercentile methods, we produced cross-walk tables linking 3 popular "legacy" depression instruments-the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (Radloff, 1977; N = 747), the Beck Depression Inventory-II (Beck, Steer, & Brown, 1996; N = 748), and the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (Kroenke, Spitzer, & Williams, 2001; N = 1,120)-to the depression metric of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS; Cella et al., 2010). The PROMIS Depression metric is centered on the U.S. general population, matching the marginal distributions of gender, age, race, and education in the 2000 U.S. census (Liu et al., 2010). The linking relationships were evaluated by resampling small subsets and estimating confidence intervals for the differences between the observed and linked PROMIS scores; in addition, PROMIS cutoff scores for depression severity were estimated to correspond with those commonly used with the legacy measures. Our results allow clinicians and researchers to retrofit existing data of 3 popular depression measures to the PROMIS Depression metric and vice versa.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0035768

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Quilty LC Bagby R 2008 The assessment of depressive severity: A review Directions in Psychiatry 28 135 146

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 480

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Choi, S. W., Schalet, B., Cook, K. F., & Cella, D.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2014
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
513-527
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
DOI
10.1037/a0035768
PMC
PMC5515387
OpenAlex
W2069518888
Cited by
480
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 7
FWCI
31.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer (1RC4CA157236-01)
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 › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
depressive symptoms, scale linking, Beck Depression Inventory-II, CES-D, PHQ-9, patient-reported outcomes, item response theory, equipercentile linking
MeSH terms
Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, 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