Validation of an IVRS version of the MADRS

James C. Mundt, David J Katzelnick, Sidney H. Kennedy, Beata S. Eisfeld, Beverley B. Bouffard, John H. Greist

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Interest in self-reported measures of depression in clinical trials has grown in recent years. This study compared the reliability and validity of the clinician-administered Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) to a computer-administered version administered over the telephone using Interactive Voice Response (IVR) technology. Sixty subjects were administered both the clinician- and computer-administered versions of the MADRS in a counter-balanced order. A subsample of 20 patients was reassessed 24 h later by both methods. Mean score differences between IVR and clinician were not statistically significant (<1 point) and a high correlation was found between forms (r = .815, p < .001). Reliability measures (Cronbach's Alpha and 24-h test-retest) were comparable. Clinicians rated the severity of subjects' sadness and pessimistic thoughts lower than subjects self-report. The data obtained in this pilot study provide support for the equivalence between the clinician and IVR versions of the MADRS.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)243-246
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Psychiatric Research
Volume40
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Telephone
Reproducibility of Results
Self Report
Clinical Trials
Technology

Keywords

  • Computer communication networks
  • Computers
  • Depression
  • Outcome assessment
  • Self assessment
  • Validation study

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Biological Psychiatry
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Mundt, J. C., Katzelnick, D. J., Kennedy, S. H., Eisfeld, B. S., Bouffard, B. B., & Greist, J. H. (2006). Validation of an IVRS version of the MADRS. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 40(3), 243-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2005.05.002

Validation of an IVRS version of the MADRS. / Mundt, James C.; Katzelnick, David J; Kennedy, Sidney H.; Eisfeld, Beata S.; Bouffard, Beverley B.; Greist, John H.

In: Journal of Psychiatric Research, Vol. 40, No. 3, 04.2006, p. 243-246.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mundt, JC, Katzelnick, DJ, Kennedy, SH, Eisfeld, BS, Bouffard, BB & Greist, JH 2006, 'Validation of an IVRS version of the MADRS', Journal of Psychiatric Research, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 243-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2005.05.002
Mundt, James C. ; Katzelnick, David J ; Kennedy, Sidney H. ; Eisfeld, Beata S. ; Bouffard, Beverley B. ; Greist, John H. / Validation of an IVRS version of the MADRS. In: Journal of Psychiatric Research. 2006 ; Vol. 40, No. 3. pp. 243-246.
@article{7c9fccaba9b944959d340b7e5b38bfb0,
title = "Validation of an IVRS version of the MADRS",
abstract = "Interest in self-reported measures of depression in clinical trials has grown in recent years. This study compared the reliability and validity of the clinician-administered Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) to a computer-administered version administered over the telephone using Interactive Voice Response (IVR) technology. Sixty subjects were administered both the clinician- and computer-administered versions of the MADRS in a counter-balanced order. A subsample of 20 patients was reassessed 24 h later by both methods. Mean score differences between IVR and clinician were not statistically significant (<1 point) and a high correlation was found between forms (r = .815, p < .001). Reliability measures (Cronbach's Alpha and 24-h test-retest) were comparable. Clinicians rated the severity of subjects' sadness and pessimistic thoughts lower than subjects self-report. The data obtained in this pilot study provide support for the equivalence between the clinician and IVR versions of the MADRS.",
keywords = "Computer communication networks, Computers, Depression, Outcome assessment, Self assessment, Validation study",
author = "Mundt, {James C.} and Katzelnick, {David J} and Kennedy, {Sidney H.} and Eisfeld, {Beata S.} and Bouffard, {Beverley B.} and Greist, {John H.}",
year = "2006",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpsychires.2005.05.002",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "243--246",
journal = "Journal of Psychiatric Research",
issn = "0022-3956",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation of an IVRS version of the MADRS

AU - Mundt, James C.

AU - Katzelnick, David J

AU - Kennedy, Sidney H.

AU - Eisfeld, Beata S.

AU - Bouffard, Beverley B.

AU - Greist, John H.

PY - 2006/4

Y1 - 2006/4

N2 - Interest in self-reported measures of depression in clinical trials has grown in recent years. This study compared the reliability and validity of the clinician-administered Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) to a computer-administered version administered over the telephone using Interactive Voice Response (IVR) technology. Sixty subjects were administered both the clinician- and computer-administered versions of the MADRS in a counter-balanced order. A subsample of 20 patients was reassessed 24 h later by both methods. Mean score differences between IVR and clinician were not statistically significant (<1 point) and a high correlation was found between forms (r = .815, p < .001). Reliability measures (Cronbach's Alpha and 24-h test-retest) were comparable. Clinicians rated the severity of subjects' sadness and pessimistic thoughts lower than subjects self-report. The data obtained in this pilot study provide support for the equivalence between the clinician and IVR versions of the MADRS.

AB - Interest in self-reported measures of depression in clinical trials has grown in recent years. This study compared the reliability and validity of the clinician-administered Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) to a computer-administered version administered over the telephone using Interactive Voice Response (IVR) technology. Sixty subjects were administered both the clinician- and computer-administered versions of the MADRS in a counter-balanced order. A subsample of 20 patients was reassessed 24 h later by both methods. Mean score differences between IVR and clinician were not statistically significant (<1 point) and a high correlation was found between forms (r = .815, p < .001). Reliability measures (Cronbach's Alpha and 24-h test-retest) were comparable. Clinicians rated the severity of subjects' sadness and pessimistic thoughts lower than subjects self-report. The data obtained in this pilot study provide support for the equivalence between the clinician and IVR versions of the MADRS.

KW - Computer communication networks

KW - Computers

KW - Depression

KW - Outcome assessment

KW - Self assessment

KW - Validation study

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=32244439635&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=32244439635&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2005.05.002

DO - 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2005.05.002

M3 - Article

C2 - 15979643

AN - SCOPUS:32244439635

VL - 40

SP - 243

EP - 246

JO - Journal of Psychiatric Research

JF - Journal of Psychiatric Research

SN - 0022-3956

IS - 3

ER -