A Review of Studies of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale in Healthy Controls: Implications for the Definition of Remission in Treatment Studies of Depression

@article{Zimmerman2004ARO,
  title={A Review of Studies of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale in Healthy Controls: Implications for the Definition of Remission in Treatment Studies of Depression},
  author={Mark Zimmerman and Iwona Chelminski and Michael A. Posternak},
  journal={The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease},
  year={2004},
  volume={192},
  pages={595-601}
}
The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) is the most commonly used symptom severity scale to evaluate the efficacy of antidepressant treatment. On the basis of an expert consensus panel, an HRSD score of ≤7 was recommended as a cutoff to define remission. Since that recommendation, little empirical work has been conducted to confirm the validity of this threshold. One approach toward determining a cutoff score for defining remission is to establish the range of values for healthy… 
Is the Cutoff to Define Remission on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression Too High?
TLDR
The results of the present study support the use of a lower cutoff on the HRSD than has been traditionally used to define remission, and the association between the breadth of the definition of remission and self-report ratings of global psychosocial functioning and quality of life.
Is it time to replace the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale as the primary outcome measure in treatment studies of depression?
TLDR
It is discussed whether it is time to replace the HRSD as the primary outcome measure in treatment studies of depression.
Reliability of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression: A meta-analysis over a period of 49years
Implications of using different cut-offs on symptom severity scales to define remission from depression
TLDR
The present report examined the impact of the cut-off score used to define remission on the percentage of depressed outpatients in ongoing treatment who are considered to be in remission, and the association between remission status and psychosocial impairment for different cut-offs.
One (effect) size does not fit at all: Interpreting clinical significance and effect sizes in depression treatment trials
TLDR
It is concluded that the proposed Hamilton Depression Rating Scale cut-off of 0.875 has no scientific basis and is likely misleading; there is no agreed upon way of delineating clinically significant from clinically insignificant and future clinical trials should consider including measures directly reflective of functioning and wellbeing, in addition to measures focused on depression psychopathology.
Empirical evidence for definitions of episode, remission, recovery, relapse and recurrence in depression: a systematic review
TLDR
The evidence for the empirical validation of Frank et al.
The Hamilton Rating Scales for Depression: A Critical Review of Clinimetric Properties of Different Versions
TLDR
The findings indicate that the HAM-D is a valid and sensitive clinimetric index, which should not be discarded in view of obsolete and not clinically relevant psychometric criteria.
Do Somatic Symptoms Predict the Severity of Depression? A Validation Study of the Korean Version of the Depression and Somatic Symptoms Scale
TLDR
The findings indicate that the DSSS is a useful tool for simultaneously, rapidly, and accurately measuring depression and somatic symptoms in clinical practice settings and in consultation fields.
...
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 74 REFERENCES
The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale in normals and depressives
TLDR
The results show that the HDRS is a valid mea‐ sure in that it discriminates between depressed patients and normals and supports Hamilton's view that only the first 17 items of the scale are appropriate for computing the score.
A New Depression Scale Designed to be Sensitive to Change
TLDR
The construction of a depression rating scale designed to be particularly sensitive to treatment effects is described, and its capacity to differentiate between responders and non-responders to antidepressant treatment was better than the HRS, indicating greater sensitivity to change.
Clinician perspective on achieving and maintaining remission in depression.
  • J. Kelsey
  • Psychology, Medicine
    The Journal of clinical psychiatry
  • 2001
TLDR
Pooled data from more than 2000 patients comparing venlafaxine, a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, and selective serotonin reptake inhibitors suggest that the dual mechanism of action of venl Lafaxine provides significantly greater efficacy in achieving remission.
The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression: One Scale or Many?
The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) has emerged as a standard in the study of depression. However, despite its extensive use and the assumption that it is a single measure, integration of
Assessing clinical significance: Application to the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression
Tingey et al.'s (1995) extensions and clarification of Jacobson, Follette & Revenstorf's (1984) methods for evaluating clinically significant change were applied to the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale
A RATING SCALE FOR DEPRESSION
  • M. Hamilton
  • Psychology, Medicine
    Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry
  • 1960
TLDR
The present scale has been devised for use only on patients already diagnosed as suffering from affective disorder of depressive type, used for quantifying the results of an interview, and its value depends entirely on the skill of the interviewer in eliciting the necessary information.
Group Differences in the Relationship Between Apathy and Depression
TLDR
The results indicate that the relationship between apathy and depression differs across diagnostic groups and, thus, support the discriminability of apathetic and depression.
Conceptualization and rationale for consensus definitions of terms in major depressive disorder. Remission, recovery, relapse, and recurrence.
TLDR
It is concluded that research on depressive illness would be well served by greater consistency in the definition change points in the course of illness, and proposes an internally consistent, empirically defined conceptual scheme for the terms remission, recovery, relapse, and recurrence.
...
...