Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the Chinese translations of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS(16)), including the Clinician-Rated (QIDS-C(16)), Self-report (QIDS-SR(16)), and Interactive Voice Response (QIDS-SR-IVR(16)) formats. Thirty depressed Chinese Americans were assessed with Chinese translations of the QIDS-SR(16), QIDS-SR-IVR(16), and QIDS-C(16). Cronbach alpha estimates of internal scale consistency on the QIDS-SR(16), QIDS-SR-IVR(16), and QIDS-C(16) were 0.70, 0.74, and 0.79, respectively. Intercorrelations among the measures were QIDS-SR(16) and QIDS-SR-IVR(16), r = 0.79; QIDS-SR(16) and QIDS-C(16), r = 0.61; and QIDS-SR-IVR(16) and QIDS-C(16), r = 0.69 (all p values < 0.01). The areas under the curve for the receiver operating characteristics of the QIDS-SR(16) and QIDS-SR-IVR(16) were 0.78 (95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.95) and 0.81 (95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.96), respectively. The respective screening sensitivities/specificities were 0.73/0.74 and 0.86/0.58. The Chinese translations of the QIDS(16) have adequate psychometric properties and may be useful tools for depression screening.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yeung et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: