• Validity and usefulness of the hospital anxiety and depression scale in carers of people with dementia: Evidence from confirmatory factor analysis, concurrent validity, and measurement invariance in a large sample

      Orrell, Martin (2017)
      OBJECTIVE: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) is a self-report measure of anxiety and depression. It is recommended for clinical assessment and has been used as the primary outcome in large clinical trials with carers of people with dementia. Its validity and utility have never been examined in this population. The current study addresses this. METHODS: In a secondary analysis of baseline data from a recent intervention trial (N = 284) with cross-validation in baseline data from a second trial (N = 230), the authors used confirmatory factor analysis to test whether a one-, two-, or three-factor structure best fit the data and used indices of model misspecification to respecify. Internal consistency, concurrent validity of obtained factors, and measurement invariance across gender, age, kinship, and cohabitation status were assessed. RESULTS: A three-factor structure best fit the data. Removal of one item improved model fit. The factors showed good internal consistency and high levels of concurrent validity. Measurement invariance was adequate across gender and kinship but not age or cohabitation status. Results were replicated in the cross-validation sample, enhancing reliability. CONCLUSION: In this group the HADS measured three factors; depression, anxiety, and negative affectivity. The depression scale can be used as originally intended, supporting results of large clinical trials. The HADS does not validly measure distress or anxiety. Consequently, clinical practice recommendations could be revisited, and future research trials should not use HADS anxiety or distress as outcomes. Researchers should pay attention to measurement invariance when using HADS to compare carer subgroups.
    • What are subjective cognitive difficulties and do they matter?

      Yates, Jennifer A. (2018)
      Background: subjective cognitive difficulties (SCD) have been associated with a higher risk of developing dementia. However, there is large variation in the way SCD are assessed and in their associations with cognitive functioning. Objective: to compare the agreement of different SCD measures in identifying people with SCD and to investigate whether SCD are more strongly associated with cognitive functioning, mood, subjective age or background variables. Methods: this cross-sectional study included 206 community-dwelling people aged ≥65. SCD were assessed with individual domain specific questions and a multiple-item scaled measure. Performance on tests of memory, attention, and executive function, and ratings of mood, subjective age and demographic information were recorded. Results: there was some classification overlap between the five measures of SCD, however of the 64 people identified as having SCD, only one person appeared in all five measures of SCD and 34 people were classified by one measure only. There were limited associations between SCD and objective cognition, with more consistent associations with mood and subjective age. Conclusions: the conflicting evidence regarding whether SCD are related to objective cognition and future risk of dementia may be due to different measures of SCD being employed. Careful consideration and standardisation is recommended regarding the cognitive domains and the reference groups for comparison, the response structure and the classification criteria. Longitudinal studies of SCD that include these considerations are needed to clarify the conceptual utility of SCD.
    • Withdrawal reaction associated with venlafaxine

      Johnson, Hazel; Bouman, Walter P.; Lawton, John D. (1998)
      -
    • WITHDRAWN: Cognitive behavioural therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression

      Jones, Hannah F. (2018)
      This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all CBT approaches compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different CBT approaches (cognitive therapy, rational emotive behaviour therapy, problem-solving therapy, self-control therapy and Coping with Depression course) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression. To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all CBT approaches compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, behavioural, humanistic, integrative, third wave CBT) for acute depression.<br/>Copyright &#xa9; 2018 The Cochrane Collaboration.
    • WITHDRAWN: Cognitive behavioural therapies versus treatment as usual for depression

      Jones, Hannah F. (2018)
      This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all cognitive behavioural therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression. To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different cognitive behavioural therapy models (cognitive therapy, rational emotive behaviour therapy, problem-solving therapy, self-control therapy and the Coping with Depression course) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression. To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all cognitive behavioural therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.<br/>Copyright &#xa9; 2018 The Cochrane Collaboration.
    • WITHDRAWN: Interpersonal, cognitive analytic and other integrative therapies versus treatment as usual for depression

      Jones, Hannah F. (2018)
      This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression. To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different integrative therapies (IPT, CAT, psychodynamic-interpersonal therapy, cognitive behavioural analysis system of psychotherapy and counselling) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression. To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.<br/>Copyright &#xa9; 2018 The Cochrane Collaboration.