The format of the original Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) was unstructured: only general instructions were provided for rating individual items. Over the years, a number of modified versions of the HAM-D have been proposed. They differ not only in the number of items, but also in modalities of administration. Structured versions, including item definitions, anchor points and semi-structured or structured interview questions, were developed. This comprehensive review was conducted to examine the clinimetric properties of the different versions of the HAM-D. The aim was to identify the HAM-D versions that best display the clinimetric properties of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. The search was conducted on MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, and yielded a total of 35,473 citations, but only the most representative studies were included. The structured versions of the HAM-D were found to display the highest inter-rater and test-retest reliability. The Clinical Interview for Depression and the 6-item HAM-D showed the highest sensitivity in differentiating active treatment from placebo. The findings indicate that the HAM-D is a valid and sensitive clinimetric index, which should not be discarded in view of obsolete and not clinically relevant psychometric criteria. The HAM-D, however, requires an informed use: unstructured forms should be avoided and the type of HAM-D version that is selected should be specified in the registration of the study protocol and in the methods of the trial.

Carrozzino D., Patierno C., Fava G.A., Guidi J. (2020). The Hamilton Rating Scales for Depression: A critical review of clinimetric properties of different versions. PSYCHOTHERAPY AND PSYCHOSOMATICS, 89(3), 133-150 [10.1159/000506879].

The Hamilton Rating Scales for Depression: A critical review of clinimetric properties of different versions

Carrozzino D.
Primo
;
Fava G. A.;Guidi J.
Ultimo
2020

Abstract

The format of the original Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) was unstructured: only general instructions were provided for rating individual items. Over the years, a number of modified versions of the HAM-D have been proposed. They differ not only in the number of items, but also in modalities of administration. Structured versions, including item definitions, anchor points and semi-structured or structured interview questions, were developed. This comprehensive review was conducted to examine the clinimetric properties of the different versions of the HAM-D. The aim was to identify the HAM-D versions that best display the clinimetric properties of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. The search was conducted on MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, and yielded a total of 35,473 citations, but only the most representative studies were included. The structured versions of the HAM-D were found to display the highest inter-rater and test-retest reliability. The Clinical Interview for Depression and the 6-item HAM-D showed the highest sensitivity in differentiating active treatment from placebo. The findings indicate that the HAM-D is a valid and sensitive clinimetric index, which should not be discarded in view of obsolete and not clinically relevant psychometric criteria. The HAM-D, however, requires an informed use: unstructured forms should be avoided and the type of HAM-D version that is selected should be specified in the registration of the study protocol and in the methods of the trial.
2020
Carrozzino D., Patierno C., Fava G.A., Guidi J. (2020). The Hamilton Rating Scales for Depression: A critical review of clinimetric properties of different versions. PSYCHOTHERAPY AND PSYCHOSOMATICS, 89(3), 133-150 [10.1159/000506879].
Carrozzino D.; Patierno C.; Fava G.A.; Guidi J.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Author_s Accepted Manuscript.pdf

Open Access dal 15/04/2021

Descrizione: Author's Accepted Manuscript
Tipo: Postprint
Licenza: Licenza per accesso libero gratuito
Dimensione 594.12 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
594.12 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/762175
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 71
  • Scopus 160
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 140
social impact