Self-evaluations of antidepressants

McNair, Douglas M.

doi:10.1007/bf00428915

Cited by 34 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Morris & Beck (1974) found that around a third of trials of tricyclic antidepressants were negative. Rogers & Clay (1975) found that 64% of trials of imipramine were negative, and McNair (1974) found that 81% of comparisons using subjective outcomes were negative. Some large and influential individual studies were essentially negative.…”

Section: Individual Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The antidepressant debate

Moncrieff

2002

Br J Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Individual Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The antidepressant debate

Moncrieff

2002

Br J Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…2,3,13,20,29,[69][70][71][72], In a review of self-rating evaluation of antidepressants [71], a self-rating of global im provement appeared as the most sensitive self-rating measure of change.…”

Section: Empirical Studies On the Sensitivity To Change Under Treatmementioning

confidence: 99%

Self-Rating Procedures in the Evaluation of Antidepressants

Möller¹,

Zerssen

1995

Psychopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-ratings are very practical and economical procedures to measure the severity of depression in intraindividual comparisons. They are sensitive to change induced by therapy and provide findings concerning the global result of therapy and its time course, which are similar to data based on ratings by psychiatrists. Due to their practicability, self-rating procedures contribute to an exact description of the time course of depression in multiple measurement designs. However, the limitations of the validity of self-rating procedures should not be neglected.

show abstract

“…Hence, it has been found (41,42) that neuroticism scores are state-dependent by test-retest examinations and that they rise with increasing severity scores of depression. The MMPI Depression Scale has been used as outcome measurement in studies on antidepressants (43).…”

Section: Diagnostic Scales: Empirical Validity -In a Separate Clinicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Headache Rating Scales: A Multiaxial Approach

Bech¹,

Kastrup²,

Loldrup³

1986

Cephalalgia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The basic principles of the rating scale procedure have been outlined, including the Likert scale, the Guilford criteria for item definitions, and the Guttman and Rasch criteria for item combinations. With these criteria, headache rates among the core symptoms of anxiety and depression. Next, we have discussed one of the prevailing scales for headache, the Waters Headache Questionnaire (WHQ), with a multiaxial approach. The WHQ thus contains a severity axis, a diagnostic axis, and a personality axis. Previous studies on the validity of the WHQ, including factor analysis, have shown that migraine and muscular headaches are not mutually exclusive categories. Studies to validate a two-dimensional diagnostic system of migraine and non-migraine headache by Rasch models are discussed. In the field of personality it was suggested, when using questionnaires like the WHQ, to focus on the concepts of acquiescence and dissimulation. Supplemental axes such as "severity of psychosocial stressors" and "social functioning" or "quality of life" should be considered in future research.

show abstract

Self-evaluations of antidepressants

Cited by 34 publications

References 60 publications

The antidepressant debate

The antidepressant debate

Self-Rating Procedures in the Evaluation of Antidepressants

Use of Headache Rating Scales: A Multiaxial Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About