Conclusions : According to the published literature , the clinimetric properties of HAM-D6 are superior to those of both the HAM-D17 and MADRS .
Background : In a study aim ed at identifying the items carrying information regarding the global severity of depression , the 6-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ( HAM-D6 ) was derived from the original 17-item version of the scale ( HAM-D17 ) .
Since then , the HAM-D6 has been used in a wide range of clinical studies .
We now provide a systematic review of the clinimetric properties of HAM-D6 in comparison with those of HAM-D17 and the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale ( MADRS ) .
Clinical use of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: is increased efficiency possible? A post hoc comparison of Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Maier and Bech subscales, Clinical Global Impression, and Symptom Checklist-90 scores.
BACKGROUND The 17-item  Hamilton Depression Rating Scale  ( HDRS ) is used as a semi-gold st and ard in research . In treatment guidelines , the HDRS measurements serve to determine response and remission and guide clinical decision making for nonresponders . However , its use in clinical practice is limited , possibly because the HDRS is time consuming . In addition , the multidimensional HDRS is criticized for not measuring a unidimensional aspect as depression severity . The Maier and the Bech , two 6-item severity subscales extracted from the HDRS , are relatively unknown . This paper investigates whether the measurements obtained with these subscales are comparable with the original HDRS measurements . METHODS Data from 2 r and omized controlled trials in 482 male and female patients , diagnosed with a major depression ( with or without dysthymia ) according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Revised Third Edition , of whom 219 participated in the trials , were reanalyzed . A st and ardized stepwise psychopharmacological treatment was compared with a combination of pharmacotherapy with Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy in a psychiatric outpatient department . Outcome measures were internal consistency and concurrent validity of HDRS , Maier , Bech , Clinical Global Impression scales , and Symptom Checklist depression subscale . Effect sizes of HDRS , Maier , and Bech were used to compare measured treatment effects for the r and omized subjects participating in the trials . Item Response Theory was used to obtain conversion tables for the HDRS , Maier , Bech , and Symptom Checklist depression subscale . RESULTS We found moderate internal consistency ( Cronbach alpha approximately 0.6 - 0.7 ) and high correlations of the Maier and Bech subscales with overall HDRS scores . Overall , there were no clinical ly relevant differences in effect sizes between Maier , Bech , and HDRS , although some differences were statistically significant . Receiver operating characteristic curves showed no difference between Maier and Bech to define remission but showed the Clinical Global Impression ratings to be unreliable . A cutoff < or = 4 corresponded with an HDRS < or = 7 criterion in both subscales . CONCLUSION In clinical practice , both Maier and Bech scales can be used as equivalents of the HDRS , but will be more efficient
Conclusions : According to the published literature , the clinimetric properties of HAM-D6 are superior to those of both the HAM-D17 and MADRS .
Background : In a study aim ed at identifying the items carrying information regarding the global severity of depression , the 6-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ( HAM-D6 ) was derived from the original 17-item version of the scale ( HAM-D17 ) .
Since then , the HAM-D6 has been used in a wide range of clinical studies .
We now provide a systematic review of the clinimetric properties of HAM-D6 in comparison with those of HAM-D17 and the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale ( MADRS ) .