A comparison of the QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, and the MADRS in an adult outpatient clinical sample

Ira H. Bernstein, A. John Rush, Diane Stegman, Laurie Macleod, Bradley Witte, Madhukar H. Trivedi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: This study compared the 16-item Clinician and Self-Report versions of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-C16 and QIDS-SR16) and the 10-item Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in adult outpatients. The comparison was based on psychometric features and their performance in identifying those in a major depressive episode as defined by the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Methods: Of 278 consecutive outpatients, 181 were depressed. Classical test theory, factor analysis, and item response theory were used to evaluate the psychometric features and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. Results: All three measures were unidimensional. All had acceptable reliability (coefficient α=.87 for MADRS10,.82 for QIDS-C16, and.80 for QIDS-SR16). Test information function was higher for the MADRS (ie, it was most sensitive to individual differences in levels of depression). The MADRS and QIDS-C16 slightly but consistently outperformed the QIDS-SR16 in differentiating between depressed versus nondepressed patients. Conclusion: All three measures have satisfactory psychometric properties and are valid screening tools for a major depressive episode.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)458-468
Number of pages11
JournalCNS Spectrums
Volume15
Issue number7
StatePublished - Jul 2010

Fingerprint

Outpatients
Psychometrics
Depression
Individuality
ROC Curve
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Self Report
Statistical Factor Analysis
Interviews
Equipment and Supplies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Bernstein, I. H., Rush, A. J., Stegman, D., Macleod, L., Witte, B., & Trivedi, M. H. (2010). A comparison of the QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, and the MADRS in an adult outpatient clinical sample. CNS Spectrums, 15(7), 458-468.

A comparison of the QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, and the MADRS in an adult outpatient clinical sample. / Bernstein, Ira H.; Rush, A. John; Stegman, Diane; Macleod, Laurie; Witte, Bradley; Trivedi, Madhukar H.

In: CNS Spectrums, Vol. 15, No. 7, 07.2010, p. 458-468.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bernstein, IH, Rush, AJ, Stegman, D, Macleod, L, Witte, B & Trivedi, MH 2010, 'A comparison of the QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, and the MADRS in an adult outpatient clinical sample', CNS Spectrums, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 458-468.
Bernstein IH, Rush AJ, Stegman D, Macleod L, Witte B, Trivedi MH. A comparison of the QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, and the MADRS in an adult outpatient clinical sample. CNS Spectrums. 2010 Jul;15(7):458-468.
Bernstein, Ira H. ; Rush, A. John ; Stegman, Diane ; Macleod, Laurie ; Witte, Bradley ; Trivedi, Madhukar H. / A comparison of the QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, and the MADRS in an adult outpatient clinical sample. In: CNS Spectrums. 2010 ; Vol. 15, No. 7. pp. 458-468.
@article{af116e384339418980f1d4af98296164,
title = "A comparison of the QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, and the MADRS in an adult outpatient clinical sample",
abstract = "Background: This study compared the 16-item Clinician and Self-Report versions of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-C16 and QIDS-SR16) and the 10-item Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in adult outpatients. The comparison was based on psychometric features and their performance in identifying those in a major depressive episode as defined by the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Methods: Of 278 consecutive outpatients, 181 were depressed. Classical test theory, factor analysis, and item response theory were used to evaluate the psychometric features and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. Results: All three measures were unidimensional. All had acceptable reliability (coefficient α=.87 for MADRS10,.82 for QIDS-C16, and.80 for QIDS-SR16). Test information function was higher for the MADRS (ie, it was most sensitive to individual differences in levels of depression). The MADRS and QIDS-C16 slightly but consistently outperformed the QIDS-SR16 in differentiating between depressed versus nondepressed patients. Conclusion: All three measures have satisfactory psychometric properties and are valid screening tools for a major depressive episode.",
author = "Bernstein, {Ira H.} and Rush, {A. John} and Diane Stegman and Laurie Macleod and Bradley Witte and Trivedi, {Madhukar H.}",
year = "2010",
month = "7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "458--468",
journal = "CNS Spectrums",
issn = "1092-8529",
publisher = "MBL Communications",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of the QIDS-C16, QIDS-SR16, and the MADRS in an adult outpatient clinical sample

AU - Bernstein, Ira H.

AU - Rush, A. John

AU - Stegman, Diane

AU - Macleod, Laurie

AU - Witte, Bradley

AU - Trivedi, Madhukar H.

PY - 2010/7

Y1 - 2010/7

N2 - Background: This study compared the 16-item Clinician and Self-Report versions of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-C16 and QIDS-SR16) and the 10-item Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in adult outpatients. The comparison was based on psychometric features and their performance in identifying those in a major depressive episode as defined by the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Methods: Of 278 consecutive outpatients, 181 were depressed. Classical test theory, factor analysis, and item response theory were used to evaluate the psychometric features and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. Results: All three measures were unidimensional. All had acceptable reliability (coefficient α=.87 for MADRS10,.82 for QIDS-C16, and.80 for QIDS-SR16). Test information function was higher for the MADRS (ie, it was most sensitive to individual differences in levels of depression). The MADRS and QIDS-C16 slightly but consistently outperformed the QIDS-SR16 in differentiating between depressed versus nondepressed patients. Conclusion: All three measures have satisfactory psychometric properties and are valid screening tools for a major depressive episode.

AB - Background: This study compared the 16-item Clinician and Self-Report versions of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-C16 and QIDS-SR16) and the 10-item Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in adult outpatients. The comparison was based on psychometric features and their performance in identifying those in a major depressive episode as defined by the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Methods: Of 278 consecutive outpatients, 181 were depressed. Classical test theory, factor analysis, and item response theory were used to evaluate the psychometric features and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. Results: All three measures were unidimensional. All had acceptable reliability (coefficient α=.87 for MADRS10,.82 for QIDS-C16, and.80 for QIDS-SR16). Test information function was higher for the MADRS (ie, it was most sensitive to individual differences in levels of depression). The MADRS and QIDS-C16 slightly but consistently outperformed the QIDS-SR16 in differentiating between depressed versus nondepressed patients. Conclusion: All three measures have satisfactory psychometric properties and are valid screening tools for a major depressive episode.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81755187074&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=81755187074&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 458

EP - 468

JO - CNS Spectrums

JF - CNS Spectrums

SN - 1092-8529

IS - 7

ER -