Kriteriumsvalidität der deutschsprachigen Version der CES-D in der Allgemeinbevölkerung

Zusammenfassung

Ziel der Studie Bisher gibt es keine Studien zur Kriteriumsvalidität der deutschen Version der CES-D in der Allgemeinbevölkerung.

Methodik Für 508 Personen aus Österreich wurden die CES-D mit ICD-Diagnosen basierend auf einem SCAN-Interview verglichen.

Ergebnisse Die gesamte Diskriminationsfähigkeit für beide Geschlechter betrug 0,836 (Receiver Operating Characteristics). Bei einem optimalen Cut-off (9/10) fand sich eine Sensitivität von 81,1 % und eine Spezifität von 74,3 %.

Schlussfolgerung Die CES-D zeigt eine ausreichende Kriteriumsvalidität sowohl für Männer als auch Frauen.

Abstract

Objective The “Center of Epidemiologic Studies – Depression scale“ (CES-D) is a well-known screening tool for depression. Until now the criterion validity of the German version of the CES-D was not investigated in a sample of the adult general population.

Methods 508 study participants of the Austrian general population completed the CES-D. ICD-10 diagnoses were established by using the Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry (SCAN). Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) analysis was conducted. Possible gender differences were explored.

Results Overall discriminating performance of the CES-D was sufficient (ROC-AUC 0,836). Using the traditional cut-off values of 15/16 and 21/22 respectively the sensitivity was 43.2 % and 32.4 %, respectively. The cut-off value developed on the basis of our sample was 9/10 with a sensitivity of 81.1 % und a specificity of 74.3 %. There were no significant gender differences.

Conclusion This is the first study investigating the criterion validity of the German version of the CES-D in the general population. The optimal cut-off values yielded sufficient sensitivity and specificity, comparable to the values of other screening tools.

Schlüsselwörter

Depression - Screening - ADS - CES-D - Kriteriumsvalidität

Keywords

depression - screening - CES-D - sensitivity - specificity

• Literatur

• 1 Vos T, Flaxman AD, Naghavi M. et al. Years lived with disability (YLDs) for 1160 sequelae of 289 diseases and injuries 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012; 380: 2163-2196
• 2 Luppa M, Heinrich S, Angermeyer MC. et al. Cost-of-illness studies of depression: a systematic review. J Affect Dis 2007; 98: 29-43
• 3 Bromet E, Andrade LH, Hwang I. et al. Cross-national epidemiology of DSM-IV major depressive episode. BMC Medicine 2011; 9: 90
• 4 Üstün TB, Sartorius N. Mental illness in general health care: an international study. New York: Wiley; 1995
• 5 U.S. preventive service task force. Screening for Depression: Recommendations and Rationale. Ann Int Med 2002; 36: 760-764
• 6 Alexandrowicz R, Weiss M, Marquart B. et al. Zur Validität eines zweistufigen Screenings am Beispiel des Depressionsscreening. Psychiat Prax 2008; 35: 294-301
• 7 Radloff LS. The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas 1977; 1: 385-401
• 8 Vilagut G, Forero CG, Barbaglia G. et al. Screening for depression in the general population with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D): a systematic review with meta-analysis. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0155431
• 9 Quiñones AR, Thielke SM, Clark ME. et al. Validity of Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale in a sample of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans. SAGE open med; 2016 4. 2050312116643906
• 10 Chiu S, Webber MP, Zeig-Owens R. et al. Validation of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale in screening for major depressive disorder among retired firefighters exposed to the World Trade Center disaster. J Affect Disord 2010; 121: 212-219
• 11 Tandon SD, Cluxton-Keller F, Leis J. et al. A comparison of three screening tools to identify perinatal depression among low-income African American women. J Affect Disord 2012; 136: 155-162
• 12 Zhang Y, Ting RZ, Lam MH. et al. Measuring depression with CES-D in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: the validity and its comparison to PHQ-9. BMC Psychiatry 2015; 15: 198
• 13 Patten SB, Burton JM, Fiest KM. et al. Validity of four screening scales for major depression in MS. Mult Scler 2015; 21: 1064-1071
• 14 Hautzinger M, Bailer M. ADS Allgemeine Depressionsskala. Manual. Weinheim: Beltz; 1992
• 15 Hautzinger M, Bailer M, Hofmeister D, Keller F. ADS Allgemeine Depressionsskala. Manual. 2.. überarb. u. neu norm. Aufl. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2012
• 16 Cole JC, Rabin AS, Smith TL. et al. Development and validation of a Rasch-derived CES-D short form. Psychol Assess 2004; 16: 360
• 17 Riediger M, Linden M, Wilms HU. Die deutsche Version der CES-D als Instrument der gerontologischen Forschung. Z Klin Psychol Psychiatr Psychother 1998; 46: 344-364
• 18 Stein J, Luppa M, Mahnke J. et al. Depressionsscreening am Telefon mittels der Allgemeinen Depressionsskala (ADS). Psychiat Prax 2014; 41: 135-141
• 19 Semmler C, Klumb PL. Geschlechtsunterschiede in der Prävalenz depressiver Symptomatik: Ein Resultat differentieller Validität der Erhebungsinstrumente?. J Public Health 2004; 12: 139-146
• 20 Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S. et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA 1999; 282: 1061-1066
• 21 Glaesmer H, Brähler E, von Lersner U. Kultursensible Diagnostik in Forschung und Praxis: Stand des Wissens und Entwicklungspotenziale (Übersichten). Psychotherapeut 2012; 57: 22-28
• 22 Roberts RE, Rhoades HM, Vernon SW. Using the CES-D scale to screen for depression and anxiety: effects of language and ethnic status. Psychiatry Res 1990; 31: 69-83
• 23 Roch S, Fydrich T, Küch D. et al. Erfassung von Depressivität und Ängstlichkeit in der stationären verhaltensmedizinisch orthopädischen Rehabilitation – eine Fragebogenvalidierung mithilfe des SKID. PRK 2016; 26: 130-136
• 24 World Health Organization. Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry (SCAN). American Psychiatric Publishing Inc; 1994
• 25 Wing JK, Babor T, Brugha T. et al. SCAN: Schedules for clinical assessment in neuropsychiatry. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1990; 47: 589-593
• 26 World Health Organization. The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Diagnostic Criteria for Research. Geneva: WHO; 1993
• 27 Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 1950; 3: 32-35
• 28 DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44: 837-845
• 29 R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2018. Im Internet: www.R-project.org (Stand 06.01.2018)
• 30 Robin X, Turck N, Hainard A. et al. pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics 2011; 12: 77
• 31 Wancata J, Alexandrowicz R, Marquart B. et al. Ist die Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) bei älteren Menschen valider als andere Depressionsscreening-Instrumente?. Neuropsychiatr 2006; 20: 240-249
• 32 Wancata J, Alexandrowicz R, Marquart B. et al. The criterion validity of the Geriatric Depression Scale: a systematic review. Acta Psychiatric Scandinavica 2006; 114: 398-410
• 33 Henderson AS, Jorm AF, MacKinnon A. et al. The prevalence of depressive disorders and the distribution of depressive symptoms in later life: a survey using Draft ICD-10 and DSM-III-R. Psychol Med 1993; 23: 719-729
• 34 Lang FU, Hubel N, Kösters M. et al. Suicidality in emergency medicine: Results from a retrospective analysis of emergency documentation forms. Neuropsychiatr 2016; 30: 69-73
• 35 Baer N, Sikorski C, Luppa M. et al. Das Stigma Depression – eine Interaktion zwischen öffentlichem Diskurs und Erfahrungsberichten Betroffener. Psychiat Prax 2016; 43: e1-e8
• 36 Wieser E, Richter-Schmiedinger T, Glückler C. et al. Psychische Störung und Partnerschaft: Auswirkungen und Belastungen affektiver Störungen auf die Partnerschaft. Psychiat Prax 2016; 43: 305-311