1984British Journal of Clinical PsychologyRequires access

A meta‐analytic comparison of the Beck Depression Inventory and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression as measures of treatment outcome

Byron C. Edwards, Michael J. Lambert, Peter W. Moran, Tony McCully, Kreig C. Smith, A. Glade Ellingson

Open publisher page 93 citations

Abstract

Some clinicians have considered the Beck Depression Inventory, a self-rating scale, too reactive to patient halo effects and, therefore, a liberal measure of treatment outcome. On the other hand, interviewer-rating scales, like the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression have been viewed as more conservative measures of treatment gain. Studies which compared the Beck Depression Inventory to the Hamilton Rating Scale, as dependent measures, were reviewed for the purpose of determining if the scales provided comparable data for assessing treatment effects. The use of meta-analysis techniques resulted in a comparison of effect sizes which indicated that the Beck Depression Inventory was significantly less liberal than the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The implications of these results for selecting outcome measures and the application of meta-analysis techniques for comparing dependent measures are discussed.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Some clinicians have considered the Beck Depression Inventory, a self-rating scale, too reactive to patient halo effects and, therefore, a liberal measure of treatment outcome. On the other hand, interviewer-rating scales, like the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression have been viewed as more conservative measures of treatment gain. Studies which compared the Beck Depression Inventory to the Hamilton Rating Scale, as dependent measures, were reviewed for the purpose of determining if the scales provided comparable data for assessing treatment effects. The use of meta-analysis techniques resulted in a comparison of effect sizes which indicated that the Beck Depression Inventory was significantly less liberal than the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The implications of these results for selecting outcome measures and the application of meta-analysis techniques for comparing dependent measures are discussed.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 93 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Some clinicians have considered the Beck Depression Inventory, a self-rating scale, too reactive to patient halo effects and, therefore, a liberal measure of treatment outcome. On the other hand, interviewer-rating scales, like the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression have been viewed as more conservative measures of treatment gain. Studies which compared the Beck Depression Inventory to the Hamilton Rating Scale, as dependent measures, were reviewed for the purpose of determining if the scales provided comparable data for assessing treatment effects. The use of meta-analysis techniques resulted in a comparison of effect sizes which indicated that the Beck Depression Inventory was significantly less liberal than the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The implications of these results for selecting outcome measures and the application of meta-analysis techniques for comparing dependent measures are discussed.

Key concepts: Beck Depression Inventory, Rating scale, Psychology, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Depression (economics), Clinical psychology, Meta-analysis, Scale (ratio)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A meta‐analytic comparison of the Beck Depression Inventory and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression as measures of treatment outcome — Research Paper | ScholarLens