A comparison of nine scales to detect depression in Parkinson disease: Which scale to use?

J. R. Williams, E. S. Hirsch, K. Anderson, A. L. Bush, S. R. Goldstein, S. Grill, Susan Weinberger Lehmann, J. T. Little, Russell Louis Margolis, J. Palanci, Gregory M Pontone, H. Weiss, Peter V Rabins, L. Marsh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: The Methods of Optimal Depression Detection in Parkinson's Disease (MOOD-PD) study compared the psychometric properties of 9 depression scales to provide guidance on scale selection in Parkinson disease (PD). Methods: Patients with PD (n 229) from community-based neurology practices completed 6 self-report scales (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI]-II, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CESD-R], 30-item Geriatric Depression Scale [GDS-30], Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-Patient [IDS-SR], Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9], and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale [UPDRS]-Part I) and were administered 3 clinician-rated scales (17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAM-D-17], Inventory of Depressive Symptoms- Clinician [IDS-C], and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] and a psychiatric interview. DSM-IV-TR diagnoses were established by an expert panel blinded to the self-reported rating scale data. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to estimate the area under the curve (AUC) of each scale. Results: All scales performed better than chance (AUC 0.75-0.85). Sensitivity ranged from 0.66 to 0.85 and specificity ranged from 0.60 to 0.88. The UPDRS Depression item had a smaller AUC than the BDI-II, HAM-D-17, IDS-C, and MADRS. The CESD-R also had a smaller AUC than the MADRS. The remaining AUCs were statistically similar. Conclusions: The GDS-30 may be the most efficient depression screening scale to use in PD because of its brevity, favorable psychometric properties, and lack of copyright protection. However, all scales studied, except for the UPDRS Depression, are valid screening tools when PD-specific cutoff scores are used.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)998-1006
Number of pages9
JournalNeurology
Volume78
Issue number13
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 27 2012

Fingerprint

Parkinson Disease
Depression
Area Under Curve
Equipment and Supplies
Parkinson's Disease
Psychometrics
Rating Scales
Epidemiologic Studies
Neurology
ROC Curve
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Geriatrics
Self Report
Psychiatry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Williams, J. R., Hirsch, E. S., Anderson, K., Bush, A. L., Goldstein, S. R., Grill, S., ... Marsh, L. (2012). A comparison of nine scales to detect depression in Parkinson disease: Which scale to use? Neurology, 78(13), 998-1006. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31824d587f

A comparison of nine scales to detect depression in Parkinson disease : Which scale to use? / Williams, J. R.; Hirsch, E. S.; Anderson, K.; Bush, A. L.; Goldstein, S. R.; Grill, S.; Lehmann, Susan Weinberger; Little, J. T.; Margolis, Russell Louis; Palanci, J.; Pontone, Gregory M; Weiss, H.; Rabins, Peter V; Marsh, L.

In: Neurology, Vol. 78, No. 13, 27.03.2012, p. 998-1006.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Williams, JR, Hirsch, ES, Anderson, K, Bush, AL, Goldstein, SR, Grill, S, Lehmann, SW, Little, JT, Margolis, RL, Palanci, J, Pontone, GM, Weiss, H, Rabins, PV & Marsh, L 2012, 'A comparison of nine scales to detect depression in Parkinson disease: Which scale to use?', Neurology, vol. 78, no. 13, pp. 998-1006. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31824d587f
Williams JR, Hirsch ES, Anderson K, Bush AL, Goldstein SR, Grill S et al. A comparison of nine scales to detect depression in Parkinson disease: Which scale to use? Neurology. 2012 Mar 27;78(13):998-1006. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31824d587f
Williams, J. R. ; Hirsch, E. S. ; Anderson, K. ; Bush, A. L. ; Goldstein, S. R. ; Grill, S. ; Lehmann, Susan Weinberger ; Little, J. T. ; Margolis, Russell Louis ; Palanci, J. ; Pontone, Gregory M ; Weiss, H. ; Rabins, Peter V ; Marsh, L. / A comparison of nine scales to detect depression in Parkinson disease : Which scale to use?. In: Neurology. 2012 ; Vol. 78, No. 13. pp. 998-1006.
@article{3d9bd3333a9748ff85939303d9afbdbb,
title = "A comparison of nine scales to detect depression in Parkinson disease: Which scale to use?",
abstract = "Objective: The Methods of Optimal Depression Detection in Parkinson's Disease (MOOD-PD) study compared the psychometric properties of 9 depression scales to provide guidance on scale selection in Parkinson disease (PD). Methods: Patients with PD (n 229) from community-based neurology practices completed 6 self-report scales (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI]-II, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CESD-R], 30-item Geriatric Depression Scale [GDS-30], Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-Patient [IDS-SR], Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9], and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale [UPDRS]-Part I) and were administered 3 clinician-rated scales (17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAM-D-17], Inventory of Depressive Symptoms- Clinician [IDS-C], and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] and a psychiatric interview. DSM-IV-TR diagnoses were established by an expert panel blinded to the self-reported rating scale data. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to estimate the area under the curve (AUC) of each scale. Results: All scales performed better than chance (AUC 0.75-0.85). Sensitivity ranged from 0.66 to 0.85 and specificity ranged from 0.60 to 0.88. The UPDRS Depression item had a smaller AUC than the BDI-II, HAM-D-17, IDS-C, and MADRS. The CESD-R also had a smaller AUC than the MADRS. The remaining AUCs were statistically similar. Conclusions: The GDS-30 may be the most efficient depression screening scale to use in PD because of its brevity, favorable psychometric properties, and lack of copyright protection. However, all scales studied, except for the UPDRS Depression, are valid screening tools when PD-specific cutoff scores are used.",
author = "Williams, {J. R.} and Hirsch, {E. S.} and K. Anderson and Bush, {A. L.} and Goldstein, {S. R.} and S. Grill and Lehmann, {Susan Weinberger} and Little, {J. T.} and Margolis, {Russell Louis} and J. Palanci and Pontone, {Gregory M} and H. Weiss and Rabins, {Peter V} and L. Marsh",
year = "2012",
month = "3",
day = "27",
doi = "10.1212/WNL.0b013e31824d587f",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "78",
pages = "998--1006",
journal = "Neurology",
issn = "0028-3878",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "13",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of nine scales to detect depression in Parkinson disease

T2 - Which scale to use?

AU - Williams, J. R.

AU - Hirsch, E. S.

AU - Anderson, K.

AU - Bush, A. L.

AU - Goldstein, S. R.

AU - Grill, S.

AU - Lehmann, Susan Weinberger

AU - Little, J. T.

AU - Margolis, Russell Louis

AU - Palanci, J.

AU - Pontone, Gregory M

AU - Weiss, H.

AU - Rabins, Peter V

AU - Marsh, L.

PY - 2012/3/27

Y1 - 2012/3/27

N2 - Objective: The Methods of Optimal Depression Detection in Parkinson's Disease (MOOD-PD) study compared the psychometric properties of 9 depression scales to provide guidance on scale selection in Parkinson disease (PD). Methods: Patients with PD (n 229) from community-based neurology practices completed 6 self-report scales (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI]-II, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CESD-R], 30-item Geriatric Depression Scale [GDS-30], Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-Patient [IDS-SR], Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9], and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale [UPDRS]-Part I) and were administered 3 clinician-rated scales (17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAM-D-17], Inventory of Depressive Symptoms- Clinician [IDS-C], and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] and a psychiatric interview. DSM-IV-TR diagnoses were established by an expert panel blinded to the self-reported rating scale data. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to estimate the area under the curve (AUC) of each scale. Results: All scales performed better than chance (AUC 0.75-0.85). Sensitivity ranged from 0.66 to 0.85 and specificity ranged from 0.60 to 0.88. The UPDRS Depression item had a smaller AUC than the BDI-II, HAM-D-17, IDS-C, and MADRS. The CESD-R also had a smaller AUC than the MADRS. The remaining AUCs were statistically similar. Conclusions: The GDS-30 may be the most efficient depression screening scale to use in PD because of its brevity, favorable psychometric properties, and lack of copyright protection. However, all scales studied, except for the UPDRS Depression, are valid screening tools when PD-specific cutoff scores are used.

AB - Objective: The Methods of Optimal Depression Detection in Parkinson's Disease (MOOD-PD) study compared the psychometric properties of 9 depression scales to provide guidance on scale selection in Parkinson disease (PD). Methods: Patients with PD (n 229) from community-based neurology practices completed 6 self-report scales (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI]-II, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CESD-R], 30-item Geriatric Depression Scale [GDS-30], Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-Patient [IDS-SR], Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9], and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale [UPDRS]-Part I) and were administered 3 clinician-rated scales (17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAM-D-17], Inventory of Depressive Symptoms- Clinician [IDS-C], and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] and a psychiatric interview. DSM-IV-TR diagnoses were established by an expert panel blinded to the self-reported rating scale data. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to estimate the area under the curve (AUC) of each scale. Results: All scales performed better than chance (AUC 0.75-0.85). Sensitivity ranged from 0.66 to 0.85 and specificity ranged from 0.60 to 0.88. The UPDRS Depression item had a smaller AUC than the BDI-II, HAM-D-17, IDS-C, and MADRS. The CESD-R also had a smaller AUC than the MADRS. The remaining AUCs were statistically similar. Conclusions: The GDS-30 may be the most efficient depression screening scale to use in PD because of its brevity, favorable psychometric properties, and lack of copyright protection. However, all scales studied, except for the UPDRS Depression, are valid screening tools when PD-specific cutoff scores are used.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84860801435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84860801435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31824d587f

DO - 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31824d587f

M3 - Article

C2 - 22422897

AN - SCOPUS:84860801435

VL - 78

SP - 998

EP - 1006

JO - Neurology

JF - Neurology

SN - 0028-3878

IS - 13

ER -