Redundancy in measures of depression

M. L. Fitzgibbon, D. F. Cella, J. A. Sweeney

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Three different scales of depression were administered to 108 subjects including hospitalized inpatients with a diagnosis of major depression (N = 36), inpatients on a renal service (N = 36), and nonhospitalized, healthy volunteers (N = 36). Subjects completed the Beck Depression Inventory and the Depression Adjective Checklist and were rated by a trained clinician on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Correlations were calculated for the total sample, each group individually, and a random sample of 36 (12 from each group). Results suggest that correlations are sufficiently high to advocate the use of only one measure of depression when one is assessing a heterogeneous group.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)372-374
Number of pages3
JournalJournal of Clinical Psychology
Volume44
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1988

Fingerprint

Inpatients
Checklist
Healthy Volunteers
Kidney
Equipment and Supplies
Redundancy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)
  • Clinical Psychology

Cite this

Fitzgibbon, M. L., Cella, D. F., & Sweeney, J. A. (1988). Redundancy in measures of depression. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44(3), 372-374.

Redundancy in measures of depression. / Fitzgibbon, M. L.; Cella, D. F.; Sweeney, J. A.

In: Journal of Clinical Psychology, Vol. 44, No. 3, 1988, p. 372-374.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fitzgibbon, ML, Cella, DF & Sweeney, JA 1988, 'Redundancy in measures of depression', Journal of Clinical Psychology, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 372-374.
Fitzgibbon ML, Cella DF, Sweeney JA. Redundancy in measures of depression. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1988;44(3):372-374.
Fitzgibbon, M. L. ; Cella, D. F. ; Sweeney, J. A. / Redundancy in measures of depression. In: Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1988 ; Vol. 44, No. 3. pp. 372-374.
@article{7a436d07e49c4c369613d152036f8505,
title = "Redundancy in measures of depression",
abstract = "Three different scales of depression were administered to 108 subjects including hospitalized inpatients with a diagnosis of major depression (N = 36), inpatients on a renal service (N = 36), and nonhospitalized, healthy volunteers (N = 36). Subjects completed the Beck Depression Inventory and the Depression Adjective Checklist and were rated by a trained clinician on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Correlations were calculated for the total sample, each group individually, and a random sample of 36 (12 from each group). Results suggest that correlations are sufficiently high to advocate the use of only one measure of depression when one is assessing a heterogeneous group.",
author = "Fitzgibbon, {M. L.} and Cella, {D. F.} and Sweeney, {J. A.}",
year = "1988",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "44",
pages = "372--374",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Psychology",
issn = "0021-9762",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Redundancy in measures of depression

AU - Fitzgibbon, M. L.

AU - Cella, D. F.

AU - Sweeney, J. A.

PY - 1988

Y1 - 1988

N2 - Three different scales of depression were administered to 108 subjects including hospitalized inpatients with a diagnosis of major depression (N = 36), inpatients on a renal service (N = 36), and nonhospitalized, healthy volunteers (N = 36). Subjects completed the Beck Depression Inventory and the Depression Adjective Checklist and were rated by a trained clinician on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Correlations were calculated for the total sample, each group individually, and a random sample of 36 (12 from each group). Results suggest that correlations are sufficiently high to advocate the use of only one measure of depression when one is assessing a heterogeneous group.

AB - Three different scales of depression were administered to 108 subjects including hospitalized inpatients with a diagnosis of major depression (N = 36), inpatients on a renal service (N = 36), and nonhospitalized, healthy volunteers (N = 36). Subjects completed the Beck Depression Inventory and the Depression Adjective Checklist and were rated by a trained clinician on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Correlations were calculated for the total sample, each group individually, and a random sample of 36 (12 from each group). Results suggest that correlations are sufficiently high to advocate the use of only one measure of depression when one is assessing a heterogeneous group.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0023881695&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0023881695&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 3384963

AN - SCOPUS:0023881695

VL - 44

SP - 372

EP - 374

JO - Journal of Clinical Psychology

JF - Journal of Clinical Psychology

SN - 0021-9762

IS - 3

ER -