Evidence-based assessment of depression in adults

Thomas E. Joiner, Rheeda L. Walker, Jeremy W. Pettit, Marisol Perez La Mar, Kelly C. Cukrowicz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

113 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

From diverse perspectives, there is little doubt that depressive symptoms cohere to form a valid and distinct syndrome. Research indicates that an evidence-based assessment of depression would include (a) measures with adequate psychometric properties; (b) adequate coverage of symptoms; (c) adequate coverage of depressed mood, anhedonia, and suicidality; (d) an approach to suicidality that distinguishes between resolved plans and preparations and desire and ideation; (e) assessment of the atypical, seasonal, and melancholic subtypes; (f) parameters of course and chronicity; and (g) comorbidity and bipolarity. These complexities need to be accounted for when certain assessment approaches are preferred, and when ambiguity exists regarding the categorical versus dimensional nature of depression, and whether and when clinician ratings outperform self-report. The authors conclude that no one extant procedure is ideal and suggest that the combination of certain interviews and self-report scales represents the state of the art for evidence-based assessment of depression.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)267-277
Number of pages11
JournalPsychological Assessment
Volume17
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Depression
Self Report
Anhedonia
Psychometrics
Comorbidity
Interviews
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Joiner, T. E., Walker, R. L., Pettit, J. W., Perez La Mar, M., & Cukrowicz, K. C. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of depression in adults. Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 267-277. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.17.3.267

Evidence-based assessment of depression in adults. / Joiner, Thomas E.; Walker, Rheeda L.; Pettit, Jeremy W.; Perez La Mar, Marisol; Cukrowicz, Kelly C.

In: Psychological Assessment, Vol. 17, No. 3, 09.2005, p. 267-277.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Joiner, TE, Walker, RL, Pettit, JW, Perez La Mar, M & Cukrowicz, KC 2005, 'Evidence-based assessment of depression in adults', Psychological Assessment, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 267-277. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.17.3.267
Joiner, Thomas E. ; Walker, Rheeda L. ; Pettit, Jeremy W. ; Perez La Mar, Marisol ; Cukrowicz, Kelly C. / Evidence-based assessment of depression in adults. In: Psychological Assessment. 2005 ; Vol. 17, No. 3. pp. 267-277.
@article{f15832836d174f2087934a59d2b99f4e,
title = "Evidence-based assessment of depression in adults",
abstract = "From diverse perspectives, there is little doubt that depressive symptoms cohere to form a valid and distinct syndrome. Research indicates that an evidence-based assessment of depression would include (a) measures with adequate psychometric properties; (b) adequate coverage of symptoms; (c) adequate coverage of depressed mood, anhedonia, and suicidality; (d) an approach to suicidality that distinguishes between resolved plans and preparations and desire and ideation; (e) assessment of the atypical, seasonal, and melancholic subtypes; (f) parameters of course and chronicity; and (g) comorbidity and bipolarity. These complexities need to be accounted for when certain assessment approaches are preferred, and when ambiguity exists regarding the categorical versus dimensional nature of depression, and whether and when clinician ratings outperform self-report. The authors conclude that no one extant procedure is ideal and suggest that the combination of certain interviews and self-report scales represents the state of the art for evidence-based assessment of depression.",
author = "Joiner, {Thomas E.} and Walker, {Rheeda L.} and Pettit, {Jeremy W.} and {Perez La Mar}, Marisol and Cukrowicz, {Kelly C.}",
year = "2005",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1037/1040-3590.17.3.267",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "267--277",
journal = "Psychological Assessment",
issn = "1040-3590",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evidence-based assessment of depression in adults

AU - Joiner, Thomas E.

AU - Walker, Rheeda L.

AU - Pettit, Jeremy W.

AU - Perez La Mar, Marisol

AU - Cukrowicz, Kelly C.

PY - 2005/9

Y1 - 2005/9

N2 - From diverse perspectives, there is little doubt that depressive symptoms cohere to form a valid and distinct syndrome. Research indicates that an evidence-based assessment of depression would include (a) measures with adequate psychometric properties; (b) adequate coverage of symptoms; (c) adequate coverage of depressed mood, anhedonia, and suicidality; (d) an approach to suicidality that distinguishes between resolved plans and preparations and desire and ideation; (e) assessment of the atypical, seasonal, and melancholic subtypes; (f) parameters of course and chronicity; and (g) comorbidity and bipolarity. These complexities need to be accounted for when certain assessment approaches are preferred, and when ambiguity exists regarding the categorical versus dimensional nature of depression, and whether and when clinician ratings outperform self-report. The authors conclude that no one extant procedure is ideal and suggest that the combination of certain interviews and self-report scales represents the state of the art for evidence-based assessment of depression.

AB - From diverse perspectives, there is little doubt that depressive symptoms cohere to form a valid and distinct syndrome. Research indicates that an evidence-based assessment of depression would include (a) measures with adequate psychometric properties; (b) adequate coverage of symptoms; (c) adequate coverage of depressed mood, anhedonia, and suicidality; (d) an approach to suicidality that distinguishes between resolved plans and preparations and desire and ideation; (e) assessment of the atypical, seasonal, and melancholic subtypes; (f) parameters of course and chronicity; and (g) comorbidity and bipolarity. These complexities need to be accounted for when certain assessment approaches are preferred, and when ambiguity exists regarding the categorical versus dimensional nature of depression, and whether and when clinician ratings outperform self-report. The authors conclude that no one extant procedure is ideal and suggest that the combination of certain interviews and self-report scales represents the state of the art for evidence-based assessment of depression.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=27644534891&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=27644534891&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/1040-3590.17.3.267

DO - 10.1037/1040-3590.17.3.267

M3 - Article

C2 - 16262453

AN - SCOPUS:27644534891

VL - 17

SP - 267

EP - 277

JO - Psychological Assessment

JF - Psychological Assessment

SN - 1040-3590

IS - 3

ER -