3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Criterion validity, severity cut scores, and test-retest reliability of the Beck Depression Inventory-II in a university counseling center sample.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Psychometric evaluation of the Beck Depression Inventory-II with primary care medical patients.

          This study evaluated the psychometric characteristics of the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II; A. T. Beck, R. A. Steer, & G. K. Brown, 1996) in a primary care medical setting. A principal-components analysis with Promax rotation indicated the presence of 2 correlated factors, Somatic-Affective and Cognitive, which explained 53.5% of the variance. A hierarchical, second-order analysis indicated that all items tap into a second-order construct of depression. Evidence for convergent validity was provided by predicted relationships with subscales from the Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-20; A. L. Stewart, R. D. Hayes, & J. E. Ware, 1988). A receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated criterion-related validity: BDI-II scores predicted a diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD), as determined by the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). This study demonstrated that the BDI-II yields reliable, internally consistent, and valid scores in a primary care medical setting, suggesting that use of the BDI-II in this setting may improve detection and treatment of depression in these medical patients.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Self-reported distress: analog or Ersatz depression?

             James C Coyne (1994)
            Vredenburg, Flett, and Krames's (1993) conclusion that self-reported distress in college students is an appropriate analog for diagnosable depression is examined in light of a broader literature. Self-reported distress is conceptually and empirically distinct from depression and depressive symptoms. Distress has stronger correlates with common psychological and social factors. Distress in college students tends to be mild and transient, and most distressed college students are not depressed. Some other features of college life also make generalizations to clinical and community samples of adults problematic. Overall, ubiquitous misunderstandings in the literature have limited recognition of the pitfalls of studying distress as an analog for diagnosable depression. It is undesirable for reasons of science, social responsibility, and the credibility of psychological models of depression.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Further evidence for the construct validity of the Beck depression Inventory-II with psychiatric outpatients.

              To provide further information about the construct validity of the Beck Depression Inventory-II the inventory was administered to 210 psychiatric outpatients along with Derogatis' SCL 90-R. As hypothesized, the Beck Depression Inventory-II was more positively correlated with scores on the Depression subscale (r = .89) than it was with scores on the Anxiety subscale of the SCL-90-R (r = .71).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Counseling Psychology
                Journal of Counseling Psychology
                American Psychological Association (APA)
                0022-0167
                2002
                2002
                : 49
                : 3
                : 381-385
                Article
                10.1037/0022-0167.49.3.381
                © 2002

                Comments

                Comment on this article