Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:21:59.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Present Use of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: Observations on Method of Assessment in Research of Depressive Disorders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

R. P. Snaith
R. P. Snaith*
Affiliation:
Academic Unit of Psychiatry, Clinical Sciences Building, St James's University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale retains its primacy in research. There have been recent important critiques. It is clear that instructions provided by its author are widely overlooked.

Method

A survey of the present use of the HDRS was conducted by inspection of five major journals publishing studies in the field of psychiatry. Note was especially made of whether a recognised version of the Scale was quoted; also of whether authors had selected specific scores on one or other of the versions to indicate a criterion for inclusion of a subject in a study, and likewise whether a specific score had been selected as an indication of recovery following some procedure or treatment.

Results

One hundred and fourteen articles were reviewed in which 71 had used a depression scale. This was the HDRS in 66% of the studies. There was considerable evidence that the instruction that the HDRS was only to be used in situations where the patient had received a diagnosis of a primary depressive illness had been ignored. There was considerable degree of arbitrary selection of Scale scores.

Conclusions

The survey causes concern about the methodology of much research in the field of assessment of severity of psychiatric disorder. The rationale of assessment by the rating scale method is considered and suggestion made for improvement in research practice.

Type
Papers
Information
The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 168 , Issue 5 , May 1996 , pp. 594 - 597
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 The Royal College of Psychiatrists 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bech, P. & Coppen, A. (eds) (1990) The Hamilton Scales. Psychopharmacology Series, 9. New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Bech, P. & Rafaelsen, O. J. (1990) The use of rating scales exemplified by a comparison of the Hamilton and the Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 62 (Suppl. 285), 128–131.Google Scholar
Costello, C. C. (1992) Research on symptoms versus research on syndromes; arguments in favour of allocating more time to the study of symptoms. British Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 304–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, A. & McGuffin, P. (1989) The classification of depressions: contemporary confusion revisited. British Journal of Psychiatry, 155, 437–443.Google Scholar
Gibbons, R. D., Clark, D. C. & Kupfer, D. J. (1993) Exactly what does the Hamilton Depression Scale measure? Journal of Psychiatric Research, 27, 259–273.Google Scholar
Hamilton, M. (1960) A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology. Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 23, 56–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamilton, M. (1967) The development of a scale for primary depressive illness. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 6, 278–296.Google Scholar
Hedlund, J. & Vieweg, B. W. (1979) The Hamilton Scale For Depression: a comparative review. Journal of Operational Psychiatry, 10, 149–165.Google Scholar
Smith, J., Williams, K., Birkett, S., et al (1994) Neuroendocrine and clinical effects of electroconvulsive therapy and their relationship to treatment outcome. Psychological Medicine, 24, 547.Google Scholar
Snaith, R. P. (1993) What do depression scales measure? British Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 293–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Praag, H. M. (1992) Reconquest of the subjective: against the waning of psychiatric diagnosis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 266–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.