HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ALL ISSUES SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a Colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Moberg, P. J. Articles by Markvart, V. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Moberg, P. J. Articles by Markvart, V.

Comparison of the Standard and Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale in Depressed Geriatric Inpatients

Received September 13, 1999; revised March 22, 2000; accepted May 11, 2000. From the Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA. Address correspondence to Dr. Moberg, Brain–Behavior Laboratory, Department of Psychiatry, 10th Floor, Gates Building, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104. e-mail: MOBERG{at}BBLMAIL.PSYCHA.UPENN.EDU

The interrater reliability of the standard Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (Ham-D) and a structured interview guide for the Ham-D (the SIGH-D) were compared in a sample of 20 elderly inpatients with major depression. Each patient was independently interviewed by four raters; two used the standard 24-item Ham-D, and the other two used a 24-item modified version of the Structured Interview Guide for the Ham-D. Systematic counterbalancing of raters and scales and a stringent evaluation schedule were used to counter position effects, spontaneous symptom change, or diurnal variation. The modified SIGH-D produced uniformly higher item- and summary-scale reliabilities than the unstructured Ham-D.

Key Words: Depression • Diagnostic Tools • Inpatients

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. B. W. Williams and K. A. Kobak Development and reliability of a structured interview guide for the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (SIGMA) The British Journal of Psychiatry, January 1, 2008; 192(1): 52 - 58. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. K. Hirsch, P. R. Duberstein, K. R. Conner, M. J. Heisel, A. Beckman, N. Franus, and Y. Conwell Future Orientation and Suicide Ideation and Attempts in Depressed Adults Ages 50 and Over Am J Geriatr Psychiatry, September 1, 2006; 14(9): 752 - 757. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. B. Newberg, J. D. Amsterdam, N. Wintering, K. Ploessl, R. L. Swanson, J. Shults, and A. Alavi 123I-ADAM Binding to Serotonin Transporters in Patients with Major Depression and Healthy Controls: A Preliminary Study J. Nucl. Med., June 1, 2005; 46(6): 973 - 977. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. M. Bagby, A. G. Ryder, D. R. Schuller, and M. B. Marshall The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: Has the Gold Standard Become a Lead Weight? Am J Psychiatry, December 1, 2004; 161(12): 2163 - 2177. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]