Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

We examined the association between the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) approach to classifying depressed patients into anxious and nonanxious subgroups and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5) anxious distress specifier subtyping. Two hundred two depressed patients were interviewed with semistructured diagnostic interviews. Patients were rated on the 17-item HAMD and the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale and completed the Clinically Useful Anxiety Outcome Scale. Both approaches toward identifying anxiety in depressed patients resulted in most of the patients meeting the anxiety subtype. Both subtyping methods were significantly correlated with clinician-rated and self-report measures of anxiety, and scores on the anxiety scales were higher in the patients who met the anxious subtype. However, DSM-5 anxious distress subtyping was only marginally associated with the HAMD anxiety/somatization factor subtyping approach (k = 0.21), and dimensional scores were only moderately correlated (r = 0.50). These findings indicate that the DSM-5 and HAMD approaches toward identifying an anxious subtype of depression are not interchangeable.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1097/NMD.0000000000000767

Type

Journal article

Publication Date

2018-02-01T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

206

Pages

152 - 154

Total pages

2