BJP Try Psychiatric Bulletin Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Psychiatric Bulletin Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Feinberg, M.
Right arrow Articles by Rawson, S. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Feinberg, M.
Right arrow Articles by Rawson, S. G.

The British Journal of Psychiatry 138: 205-209 (1981)
© 1981 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

The Carroll rating scale for depression. III. Comparison with other rating instruments

M Feinberg, BJ Carroll, PE Smouse and SG Rawson

Patients in an effective disorders out-patient clinic were studied with four depression rating scales: the Hamilton rating scale (HRS) the Carroll rating scale (CRS) a clinical global rating of depression (CGRD) and the visual analogue scale (VAS). The overall correlations between the self ratings (CRS, VAS) and the observer ratings (HRS, CGRD) were highly significant. Both the HRS and the CRS distinguished mild from moderate, and moderate from severe depression. CRS scores increased more rapidly than HRS scores with increasing severity of depression. The concordance of self ratings and observer ratings was highest for the two structured instruments (HRS and CRS), and was lowest for the two global scales (CGRD and VAS). The global scales have the advantages of speed and simplicity, but at the cost of some reliability. Patients with non-endogenous depression had significantly increased self rating scores in comparison to patients with unipolar or bipolar endogenous depression. The correlations between the self ratings and the observer ratings were notably lower in patients with non-endogenous depression than in patients with endogenous depression. Euthymic bipolar patients rated themselves on the VAS as significantly less well than euthymic unipolar patients. The clinical and research implications of these findings are discussed.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Psychiatr. Serv.Home page
A. J. Rush, T. J. Carmody, H. M. Ibrahim, M. H. Trivedi, M. M. Biggs, K. Shores-Wilson, M. L. Crismon, M. G. Toprac, and T. M. Kashner
Comparison of Self-Report and Clinician Ratings on Two Inventories of Depressive Symptomatology
Psychiatr Serv, June 1, 2006; 57(6): 829 - 837.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. PsychiatryHome page
R. M. Bagby, A. G. Ryder, D. R. Schuller, and M. B. Marshall
The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: Has the Gold Standard Become a Lead Weight?
Am J Psychiatry, December 1, 2004; 161(12): 2163 - 2177.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJGPHome page
H. G. Koenig, L. K. George, D. B. Larson, M. E. McCullough, P. S. Branch, and M. Kuchibhatla
Depressive Symptoms and Nine-Year Survival of 1,001 Male Veterans Hospitalized With Medical Illness
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry, May 1, 1999; 7(2): 124 - 131.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Psychiatric Bulletin Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
Copyright © 1981 The Royal College of Psychiatrists.