3.9 Review

Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory-II: a comprehensive review

期刊

REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE PSIQUIATRIA
卷 35, 期 4, 页码 416-431

出版社

ASSOC BRASILEIRA PSIQUIATRIA
DOI: 10.1590/1516-4446-2012-1048

关键词

Psychometric scale; depression; reliability; validity; classical testing theory; item response theory

资金

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [2008/11415-9]
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To review the psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) as a self-report measure of depression in a variety of settings and populations. Methods: Relevant studies of the BDI-II were retrieved through a search of electronic databases, a hand search, and contact with authors. Retained studies (k = 118) were allocated into three groups: non-clinical, psychiatric/institutionalized, and medical samples. Results: The internal consistency was described as around 0.9 and the retest reliability ranged from 0.73 to 0.96. The correlation between BDI-II and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-I) was high and substantial overlap with measures of depression and anxiety was reported. The criterion-based validity showed good sensitivity and specificity for detecting depression in comparison to the adopted gold standard. However, the cutoff score to screen for depression varied according to the type of sample. Factor analysis showed a robust dimension of general depression composed by two constructs: cognitive-affective and somatic-vegetative. Conclusions: The BDI-II is a relevant psychometric instrument, showing high reliability, capacity to discriminate between depressed and non-depressed subjects, and improved concurrent, content, and structural validity. Based on available psychometric evidence, the BDI-II can be viewed as a cost-effective questionnaire for measuring the severity of depression, with broad applicability for research and clinical practice worldwide.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据