Loading…

Measuring depression using item response theory: an examination of three measures of depressive symptomatology

Evaluations of assessment instruments using classical test theory typically rely on indices of internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and construct validity. However, the use of models from item response theory (IRT) allows comparison of instruments (and items) in terms of the information th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of methods in psychiatric research 2012-03, Vol.21 (1), p.76-85
Main Authors: Olino, Thomas M., Yu, Lan, Klein, Daniel N., Rohde, Paul, Seeley, John R., Pilkonis, Paul A., Lewinsohn, Peter M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-5c1bf8df51df98ae7e84e0cf332ba2766572b5fc3d01954ac36dc8096898dea93
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-5c1bf8df51df98ae7e84e0cf332ba2766572b5fc3d01954ac36dc8096898dea93
container_end_page 85
container_issue 1
container_start_page 76
container_title International journal of methods in psychiatric research
container_volume 21
creator Olino, Thomas M.
Yu, Lan
Klein, Daniel N.
Rohde, Paul
Seeley, John R.
Pilkonis, Paul A.
Lewinsohn, Peter M.
description Evaluations of assessment instruments using classical test theory typically rely on indices of internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and construct validity. However, the use of models from item response theory (IRT) allows comparison of instruments (and items) in terms of the information they provide and where they provide it along the continuum of severity of the construct being assessed. Such results help to identify the measures most appropriate for specific clinical and research contexts. The present study examined the functioning of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies – Depression (CES‐D) scale, and the nine primary symptoms from the depression module of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia – Children (K‐SADS) using IRT methods. A large sample of adolescents (n = 1709) completed the BDI, CES‐D scale, and K‐SADS. IRT calibration analyses demonstrated that the BDI and CES‐D scale performed well in similar ranges of depressive severity (approximately −1 to +3 standard deviations [SDs]), although the BDI provided more information at higher severity levels and the CES‐D scale at lower severity levels. The K‐SADS depression items, which are dichotomous and focused on clinical disorder, provided the least information that was restricted to the narrowest range (approximately +1 to +3 SDs). This work finds consistency between past rationale for the use of the BDI in clinical samples while using the CES‐D scale in epidemiological studies. The results for the K‐SADS suggest that interview measures may benefit from increasing the number of items and/or response options to collect more psychometric information. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/mpr.1348
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3302969</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>927988065</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-5c1bf8df51df98ae7e84e0cf332ba2766572b5fc3d01954ac36dc8096898dea93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1u1DAUhS0EoqUg8QQoO9ik-Gec2CyQUIGhVTsgVNSl5XFupobYDnZSmrfH6UxHdMHK1rmfPv8chF4SfEwwpm9dH48JW4hH6JBwXpe44vXjvMcLWQrJyAF6ltJPjImgtHqKDiilMjPVIfIXoNMYrd8UDfQRUrLBF2OaAzuAK3LUB5-gGK4hxOldoX0Bt9pZr4cZDW2eRIDC3Ykgzcm96gaKNLl-CE4PoQub6Tl60uouwYvdeoR-fP50efKlPP-6PD35cF4aTpgouSHrVjQtJ00rhYYaxAKwaRmja03rKj-PrnlrWIOJ5AttWNUYgWUlpGhAS3aE3m-9_bh20BjwQ9Sd6qN1Ok4qaKseTry9VptwoxjDVFaz4PVOEMPvEdKgnE0Guk57CGNSktZSiPyHmXyzJU0MKUVo96cQrOZ2VG5Hze1k9NW_t9qD93VkoNwCf2wH039F6uLb951wx9s0wO2e1_GXqmpWc3W1Wip-uVyuzq5W6iP7C0QPrNo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>927988065</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Measuring depression using item response theory: an examination of three measures of depressive symptomatology</title><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><creator>Olino, Thomas M. ; Yu, Lan ; Klein, Daniel N. ; Rohde, Paul ; Seeley, John R. ; Pilkonis, Paul A. ; Lewinsohn, Peter M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Olino, Thomas M. ; Yu, Lan ; Klein, Daniel N. ; Rohde, Paul ; Seeley, John R. ; Pilkonis, Paul A. ; Lewinsohn, Peter M.</creatorcontrib><description>Evaluations of assessment instruments using classical test theory typically rely on indices of internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and construct validity. However, the use of models from item response theory (IRT) allows comparison of instruments (and items) in terms of the information they provide and where they provide it along the continuum of severity of the construct being assessed. Such results help to identify the measures most appropriate for specific clinical and research contexts. The present study examined the functioning of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies – Depression (CES‐D) scale, and the nine primary symptoms from the depression module of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia – Children (K‐SADS) using IRT methods. A large sample of adolescents (n = 1709) completed the BDI, CES‐D scale, and K‐SADS. IRT calibration analyses demonstrated that the BDI and CES‐D scale performed well in similar ranges of depressive severity (approximately −1 to +3 standard deviations [SDs]), although the BDI provided more information at higher severity levels and the CES‐D scale at lower severity levels. The K‐SADS depression items, which are dichotomous and focused on clinical disorder, provided the least information that was restricted to the narrowest range (approximately +1 to +3 SDs). This work finds consistency between past rationale for the use of the BDI in clinical samples while using the CES‐D scale in epidemiological studies. The results for the K‐SADS suggest that interview measures may benefit from increasing the number of items and/or response options to collect more psychometric information. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1049-8931</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1557-0657</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/mpr.1348</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22290656</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) ; Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D) scale ; depression ; Depressive Disorder - diagnosis ; Depressive Disorder - epidemiology ; Female ; Humans ; item response theory (IRT) ; Male ; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales ; Psychometrics ; Reproducibility of Results ; Retrospective Studies ; Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia - Children (K-SADS) ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Students - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2012-03, Vol.21 (1), p.76-85</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2012 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-5c1bf8df51df98ae7e84e0cf332ba2766572b5fc3d01954ac36dc8096898dea93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-5c1bf8df51df98ae7e84e0cf332ba2766572b5fc3d01954ac36dc8096898dea93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3302969/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3302969/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22290656$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Olino, Thomas M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Lan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klein, Daniel N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rohde, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seeley, John R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pilkonis, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewinsohn, Peter M.</creatorcontrib><title>Measuring depression using item response theory: an examination of three measures of depressive symptomatology</title><title>International journal of methods in psychiatric research</title><addtitle>Int. J. Methods Psychiatr. Res</addtitle><description>Evaluations of assessment instruments using classical test theory typically rely on indices of internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and construct validity. However, the use of models from item response theory (IRT) allows comparison of instruments (and items) in terms of the information they provide and where they provide it along the continuum of severity of the construct being assessed. Such results help to identify the measures most appropriate for specific clinical and research contexts. The present study examined the functioning of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies – Depression (CES‐D) scale, and the nine primary symptoms from the depression module of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia – Children (K‐SADS) using IRT methods. A large sample of adolescents (n = 1709) completed the BDI, CES‐D scale, and K‐SADS. IRT calibration analyses demonstrated that the BDI and CES‐D scale performed well in similar ranges of depressive severity (approximately −1 to +3 standard deviations [SDs]), although the BDI provided more information at higher severity levels and the CES‐D scale at lower severity levels. The K‐SADS depression items, which are dichotomous and focused on clinical disorder, provided the least information that was restricted to the narrowest range (approximately +1 to +3 SDs). This work finds consistency between past rationale for the use of the BDI in clinical samples while using the CES‐D scale in epidemiological studies. The results for the K‐SADS suggest that interview measures may benefit from increasing the number of items and/or response options to collect more psychometric information. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)</subject><subject>Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D) scale</subject><subject>depression</subject><subject>Depressive Disorder - diagnosis</subject><subject>Depressive Disorder - epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>item response theory (IRT)</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia - Children (K-SADS)</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Students - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>1049-8931</issn><issn>1557-0657</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kc1u1DAUhS0EoqUg8QQoO9ik-Gec2CyQUIGhVTsgVNSl5XFupobYDnZSmrfH6UxHdMHK1rmfPv8chF4SfEwwpm9dH48JW4hH6JBwXpe44vXjvMcLWQrJyAF6ltJPjImgtHqKDiilMjPVIfIXoNMYrd8UDfQRUrLBF2OaAzuAK3LUB5-gGK4hxOldoX0Bt9pZr4cZDW2eRIDC3Ykgzcm96gaKNLl-CE4PoQub6Tl60uouwYvdeoR-fP50efKlPP-6PD35cF4aTpgouSHrVjQtJ00rhYYaxAKwaRmja03rKj-PrnlrWIOJ5AttWNUYgWUlpGhAS3aE3m-9_bh20BjwQ9Sd6qN1Ok4qaKseTry9VptwoxjDVFaz4PVOEMPvEdKgnE0Guk57CGNSktZSiPyHmXyzJU0MKUVo96cQrOZ2VG5Hze1k9NW_t9qD93VkoNwCf2wH039F6uLb951wx9s0wO2e1_GXqmpWc3W1Wip-uVyuzq5W6iP7C0QPrNo</recordid><startdate>201203</startdate><enddate>201203</enddate><creator>Olino, Thomas M.</creator><creator>Yu, Lan</creator><creator>Klein, Daniel N.</creator><creator>Rohde, Paul</creator><creator>Seeley, John R.</creator><creator>Pilkonis, Paul A.</creator><creator>Lewinsohn, Peter M.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201203</creationdate><title>Measuring depression using item response theory: an examination of three measures of depressive symptomatology</title><author>Olino, Thomas M. ; Yu, Lan ; Klein, Daniel N. ; Rohde, Paul ; Seeley, John R. ; Pilkonis, Paul A. ; Lewinsohn, Peter M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-5c1bf8df51df98ae7e84e0cf332ba2766572b5fc3d01954ac36dc8096898dea93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)</topic><topic>Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D) scale</topic><topic>depression</topic><topic>Depressive Disorder - diagnosis</topic><topic>Depressive Disorder - epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>item response theory (IRT)</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Psychiatric Status Rating Scales</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia - Children (K-SADS)</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Students - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Olino, Thomas M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Lan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klein, Daniel N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rohde, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seeley, John R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pilkonis, Paul A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewinsohn, Peter M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal of methods in psychiatric research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Olino, Thomas M.</au><au>Yu, Lan</au><au>Klein, Daniel N.</au><au>Rohde, Paul</au><au>Seeley, John R.</au><au>Pilkonis, Paul A.</au><au>Lewinsohn, Peter M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Measuring depression using item response theory: an examination of three measures of depressive symptomatology</atitle><jtitle>International journal of methods in psychiatric research</jtitle><addtitle>Int. J. Methods Psychiatr. Res</addtitle><date>2012-03</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>76</spage><epage>85</epage><pages>76-85</pages><issn>1049-8931</issn><eissn>1557-0657</eissn><abstract>Evaluations of assessment instruments using classical test theory typically rely on indices of internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and construct validity. However, the use of models from item response theory (IRT) allows comparison of instruments (and items) in terms of the information they provide and where they provide it along the continuum of severity of the construct being assessed. Such results help to identify the measures most appropriate for specific clinical and research contexts. The present study examined the functioning of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies – Depression (CES‐D) scale, and the nine primary symptoms from the depression module of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia – Children (K‐SADS) using IRT methods. A large sample of adolescents (n = 1709) completed the BDI, CES‐D scale, and K‐SADS. IRT calibration analyses demonstrated that the BDI and CES‐D scale performed well in similar ranges of depressive severity (approximately −1 to +3 standard deviations [SDs]), although the BDI provided more information at higher severity levels and the CES‐D scale at lower severity levels. The K‐SADS depression items, which are dichotomous and focused on clinical disorder, provided the least information that was restricted to the narrowest range (approximately +1 to +3 SDs). This work finds consistency between past rationale for the use of the BDI in clinical samples while using the CES‐D scale in epidemiological studies. The results for the K‐SADS suggest that interview measures may benefit from increasing the number of items and/or response options to collect more psychometric information. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</pub><pmid>22290656</pmid><doi>10.1002/mpr.1348</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1049-8931
ispartof International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2012-03, Vol.21 (1), p.76-85
issn 1049-8931
1557-0657
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3302969
source Open Access: PubMed Central
subjects Adolescent
Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)
Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression (CES-D) scale
depression
Depressive Disorder - diagnosis
Depressive Disorder - epidemiology
Female
Humans
item response theory (IRT)
Male
Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
Psychometrics
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia - Children (K-SADS)
Sensitivity and Specificity
Students - statistics & numerical data
Surveys and Questionnaires
title Measuring depression using item response theory: an examination of three measures of depressive symptomatology
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T13%3A10%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Measuring%20depression%20using%20item%20response%20theory:%20an%20examination%20of%20three%20measures%20of%20depressive%20symptomatology&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20methods%20in%20psychiatric%20research&rft.au=Olino,%20Thomas%20M.&rft.date=2012-03&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=76&rft.epage=85&rft.pages=76-85&rft.issn=1049-8931&rft.eissn=1557-0657&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/mpr.1348&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E927988065%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5138-5c1bf8df51df98ae7e84e0cf332ba2766572b5fc3d01954ac36dc8096898dea93%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=927988065&rft_id=info:pmid/22290656&rfr_iscdi=true