Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 18, 2025

Validation of a Psychosocial Intervention on Body Image in Older People: An Experimental Design
Published on: May 31, 2021
Measurement invariance of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Scale-Depression within and across six diverse
Irina Bergenfeld1, Nadine J Kaslow2, Kathryn M Yount1
1Department of Global Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University.
Abstract:
Depression, a major contributor to the global burden of disease, is an outcome of interest in clinical trials. Researchers and clinicians note that depression often presents differently across cultures, posing challenges in the accurate measurement of depressive symptoms across populations. A commonly used self-administered screening tool to measure depressive symptoms, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Scale-Depression (CES-D), has been translated into dozens of languages and used in thousands of studies, yet gaps remain in our understanding of its factor structure and invariance across studies and over time in the context of interventions. In this secondary analysis, we sampled six recent trials from lower- and middle-income countries to (a) establish the factor structure of the CES-D, (b) assess measurement invariance of the CES-D across treatment versus control arms and over time, (c) examine cross-study invariance, and (d) identify items that may be driving potential noninvariance. We performed exploratory/confirmatory factor analysis to establish the factor structure of the CES-D within each trial and used multiple group confirmatory analysis to assess within-study cross-arm/cross-time and cross-study invariance. After removal of positive affect items, a unidimensional model performed equivalently over time and across arms within trials, but exhibited noninvariance across trials, supporting prior literature describing differences in factor structure of the scale across populations. While our findings suggest that the CES-D without positive affect items is a valid measure of depressive symptoms within trials in our sample, caution is warranted in interpreting the findings of meta-analyses and multisite/multicountry studies using the CES-D as an outcome measure. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
More Related Videos
05:53Measuring Frailty in HIV-infected Individuals. Identification of Frail Patients is the First Step to Amelioration and Reversal of Frailty
Published on: July 24, 2013
08:25Polar Histogram Visualization of Acute Stress Disorder Scale Scores for Comprehensive Clinical Assessment
Published on: December 6, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Regression Toward the Mean
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...
Depressive Disorders: MDD and Dysthymia
Central Tendency: Analysis
The mean is one such measure, calculated by totaling all values in a dataset and dividing by the number of values. For instance, the mean blood pressure reading (120, 130, 140, 150) would be 135. However, the mean can be affected by extreme values or outliers.
The median, another measure,...
Depressive Disorders: Etiology
Biological Factors in Depression
Biological predispositions significantly influence the risk of developing depressive disorders. Genetic studies highlight the role of variations in the serotonin transporter...