What are 'good' depression symptoms? Comparing the centrality of DSM and non-DSM symptoms of depression in a network analysis

Eiko I. Fried, Sacha Epskamp, Randolph Nesse, Francis Tuerlinckx, Denny Borsboom

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

124 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background The symptoms for Major Depression (MD) defined in the DSM-5 differ markedly from symptoms assessed in common rating scales, and the empirical question about core depression symptoms is unresolved. Here we conceptualize depression as a complex dynamic system of interacting symptoms to examine what symptoms are most central to driving depressive processes. Methods We constructed a network of 28 depression symptoms assessed via the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-30) in 3,463 depressed outpatients from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR∗D) study. We estimated the centrality of all IDS-30 symptoms, and compared the centrality of DSM and non-DSM symptoms; centrality reflects the connectedness of each symptom with all other symptoms. Results A network with 28 intertwined symptoms emerged, and symptoms differed substantially in their centrality values. Both DSM symptoms (e.g., sad mood) and non-DSM symptoms (e.g., anxiety) were among the most central symptoms, and DSM criteria were not more central than non-DSM symptoms. Limitations Many subjects enrolled in STAR∗D reported comorbid medical and psychiatric conditions which may have affected symptom presentation. Conclusion The network perspective neither supports the standard psychometric notion that depression symptoms are equivalent indicators of MD, nor the common assumption that DSM symptoms of depression are of higher clinical relevance than non-DSM depression symptoms. The findings suggest the value of research focusing on especially central symptoms to increase the accuracy of predicting outcomes such as the course of illness, probability of relapse, and treatment response.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)314-320
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Affective Disorders
Volume189
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2016

Fingerprint

Depression
Psychometrics
Psychiatry
Outpatients
Therapeutics
Anxiety
Recurrence
Equipment and Supplies
Research

Keywords

  • Centrality
  • Depression symptoms
  • Major depression
  • Network analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Clinical Psychology

Cite this

What are 'good' depression symptoms? Comparing the centrality of DSM and non-DSM symptoms of depression in a network analysis. / Fried, Eiko I.; Epskamp, Sacha; Nesse, Randolph; Tuerlinckx, Francis; Borsboom, Denny.

In: Journal of Affective Disorders, Vol. 189, 01.01.2016, p. 314-320.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d6b6ae2ba2fa42cf910e768e4ea2bed0,
title = "What are 'good' depression symptoms? Comparing the centrality of DSM and non-DSM symptoms of depression in a network analysis",
abstract = "Background The symptoms for Major Depression (MD) defined in the DSM-5 differ markedly from symptoms assessed in common rating scales, and the empirical question about core depression symptoms is unresolved. Here we conceptualize depression as a complex dynamic system of interacting symptoms to examine what symptoms are most central to driving depressive processes. Methods We constructed a network of 28 depression symptoms assessed via the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-30) in 3,463 depressed outpatients from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR∗D) study. We estimated the centrality of all IDS-30 symptoms, and compared the centrality of DSM and non-DSM symptoms; centrality reflects the connectedness of each symptom with all other symptoms. Results A network with 28 intertwined symptoms emerged, and symptoms differed substantially in their centrality values. Both DSM symptoms (e.g., sad mood) and non-DSM symptoms (e.g., anxiety) were among the most central symptoms, and DSM criteria were not more central than non-DSM symptoms. Limitations Many subjects enrolled in STAR∗D reported comorbid medical and psychiatric conditions which may have affected symptom presentation. Conclusion The network perspective neither supports the standard psychometric notion that depression symptoms are equivalent indicators of MD, nor the common assumption that DSM symptoms of depression are of higher clinical relevance than non-DSM depression symptoms. The findings suggest the value of research focusing on especially central symptoms to increase the accuracy of predicting outcomes such as the course of illness, probability of relapse, and treatment response.",
keywords = "Centrality, Depression symptoms, Major depression, Network analysis",
author = "Fried, {Eiko I.} and Sacha Epskamp and Randolph Nesse and Francis Tuerlinckx and Denny Borsboom",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jad.2015.09.005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "189",
pages = "314--320",
journal = "Journal of Affective Disorders",
issn = "0165-0327",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What are 'good' depression symptoms? Comparing the centrality of DSM and non-DSM symptoms of depression in a network analysis

AU - Fried, Eiko I.

AU - Epskamp, Sacha

AU - Nesse, Randolph

AU - Tuerlinckx, Francis

AU - Borsboom, Denny

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - Background The symptoms for Major Depression (MD) defined in the DSM-5 differ markedly from symptoms assessed in common rating scales, and the empirical question about core depression symptoms is unresolved. Here we conceptualize depression as a complex dynamic system of interacting symptoms to examine what symptoms are most central to driving depressive processes. Methods We constructed a network of 28 depression symptoms assessed via the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-30) in 3,463 depressed outpatients from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR∗D) study. We estimated the centrality of all IDS-30 symptoms, and compared the centrality of DSM and non-DSM symptoms; centrality reflects the connectedness of each symptom with all other symptoms. Results A network with 28 intertwined symptoms emerged, and symptoms differed substantially in their centrality values. Both DSM symptoms (e.g., sad mood) and non-DSM symptoms (e.g., anxiety) were among the most central symptoms, and DSM criteria were not more central than non-DSM symptoms. Limitations Many subjects enrolled in STAR∗D reported comorbid medical and psychiatric conditions which may have affected symptom presentation. Conclusion The network perspective neither supports the standard psychometric notion that depression symptoms are equivalent indicators of MD, nor the common assumption that DSM symptoms of depression are of higher clinical relevance than non-DSM depression symptoms. The findings suggest the value of research focusing on especially central symptoms to increase the accuracy of predicting outcomes such as the course of illness, probability of relapse, and treatment response.

AB - Background The symptoms for Major Depression (MD) defined in the DSM-5 differ markedly from symptoms assessed in common rating scales, and the empirical question about core depression symptoms is unresolved. Here we conceptualize depression as a complex dynamic system of interacting symptoms to examine what symptoms are most central to driving depressive processes. Methods We constructed a network of 28 depression symptoms assessed via the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-30) in 3,463 depressed outpatients from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR∗D) study. We estimated the centrality of all IDS-30 symptoms, and compared the centrality of DSM and non-DSM symptoms; centrality reflects the connectedness of each symptom with all other symptoms. Results A network with 28 intertwined symptoms emerged, and symptoms differed substantially in their centrality values. Both DSM symptoms (e.g., sad mood) and non-DSM symptoms (e.g., anxiety) were among the most central symptoms, and DSM criteria were not more central than non-DSM symptoms. Limitations Many subjects enrolled in STAR∗D reported comorbid medical and psychiatric conditions which may have affected symptom presentation. Conclusion The network perspective neither supports the standard psychometric notion that depression symptoms are equivalent indicators of MD, nor the common assumption that DSM symptoms of depression are of higher clinical relevance than non-DSM depression symptoms. The findings suggest the value of research focusing on especially central symptoms to increase the accuracy of predicting outcomes such as the course of illness, probability of relapse, and treatment response.

KW - Centrality

KW - Depression symptoms

KW - Major depression

KW - Network analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84943609022&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84943609022&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jad.2015.09.005

DO - 10.1016/j.jad.2015.09.005

M3 - Article

VL - 189

SP - 314

EP - 320

JO - Journal of Affective Disorders

JF - Journal of Affective Disorders

SN - 0165-0327

ER -