CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 412Psychometric Methodologies and TestingAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesHealth Education and Validation

Measuring depressive symptoms in illness populations: Psychometric properties of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale

Devins, Gerald M., Orme, Carolee M., Costello, Charles G., Binik, Yitzchak M., Frizzell, Beverly, Stam, Henderikus J., Pullin, Wendy M.·1988·Psychology & Health
DOI 10.1080/08870448808400349
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Psychometric properties of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale were examined among five groups that vaned in physical health and illness. Participants included 175 healthy undergraduates, 176 individuals attending family physicians, 107 progressive renal disease, 135 end-stage renal disease, and 120 cancer patients. Individual item and total CES-D scores were relatively symmetrically distributed and varied across the entire range of potentially obtainable scores. Reliability analyses yielded internal consistency (alpha) coefficients ranging from 0.63 to 0.93 across the groups. Test-retest reliability (3-month lag) was 0.61. The CES-D's factorial composition was highly similar to that observed among community volunteers. Varimax-rotated principal-components analyses extracted four factors, corresponding to “depressive affect”, “positive affect”, “somatic and retarded activity”, and “interpersonal”. Moreover, this pattern did not change despite differences in physical health-illness across the groups. although a significant Groups X Items (repeated measures) interaction indicated that “positive affect” items were lower among progressive renal failure patients than among the other groups. The psychometric characteristics of the CES-D scale, thus, appear to be relatively constant across the five health-illness populations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08870448808400349

Cites

33 of 33 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Devins, G. M., Orme, C. M., Costello, C. G., Binik, Y. M., Frizzell, B., Stam, H. J., & Pullin, W. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Calgary (CA)
  • McGill University (CA)
ORCID
Venue
Psychology & Health
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1988-04
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
139-156
ISSN
  • 0887-0446 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-8321
DOI
10.1080/08870448808400349
OpenAlex
W2009101103
Cited by
412
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 16
FWCI
2.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Psychology and Health (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Calgary
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 › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, depressive symptoms, psychometric properties, reliability statistics, factor structure, end-stage renal disease, progressive renal failure, cancer patients, physical illness, positive affect, somatic symptoms, test-retest reliability

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