↓ Skip to main content

The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale is an adequate screening instrument for depression and anxiety disorder in adults with congential heart disease

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale is an adequate screening instrument for depression and anxiety disorder in adults with congential heart disease
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0747-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ju Ryoung Moon, June Huh, Jinyoung Song, I-Seok Kang, Seung Woo Park, Sung-A Chang, Ji-Hyuk Yang, Tae-Gook Jun

Abstract

The Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) is an instrument that is commonly used to screen for depression in patients with chronic disease, but the characteristics of the CES-D in adults with congenital heart disease (CHD) have not yet been studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the criterion validities and the predictive powers of the CES-D for depression and anxiety disorders in adults with CHD. Two hundred patients were screened with the CES-D and secondarily interviewed with a diagnostic instrument, i.e., the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Instrument. The sensitivity and specificity values of the CES-D were calculated by cross-tabulation at different cutoff scores. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the optimal cutoff point for each disorder and to assess the predictive power of the instrument. The CES-D exhibited satisfactory criterion validities for depression and for all combinations of depression and/or anxiety. With a desired sensitivity of at least 80%, the optimal cutoff scores were 18. The predictive power of the CES-D in the patients was best for major depression and dysthymia (area under the ROC curve: 0.92) followed by the score for any combination of depression and/or anxiety (0.88). The use of CES-D to simultaneously screen for both depression and anxiety disorders may be useful in adults with CHD. CESDEP 212. Registered 2 March 2014 (retrospectively registered).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 96 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Researcher 8 8%
Professor 5 5%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 38 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 21%
Psychology 11 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 39 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,478,452
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,354
of 2,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,077
of 315,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#33
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,613 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.