Hamilton Depression Rating Scale Depression is a prevalent psychiatric illness, afflicting approximately 16% of all Americans (Simon, 2003). Environmental and biological factors play a major role in an individual’s likelihood to develop depression. The exact causes of depression are unknown, but certain common triggers are attributed to the onset of symptoms, such as stress or chemical imbalance. Although some forms of depression are inherited, individuals without a prior family history of depression can also experience it. Throughout one’s lifespan different risk factors, such as life changing events or traumatic experiences, can lead to episodic depression, which is normal in most cases. Others may experience chronic severe depression with extreme, debilitating symptoms, which are at higher risk of suicide. During the early development of psychology, depression was not initially viewed as a psychological disorder. Due to the evolution of psychology as a science, psychologists have a more profound understanding of how one’s biological and environmental factors affect one’s moods, behaviors, and overall health. Today, depression is a commonly diagnosed and treated psychological disorder. Professionals have developed various psychological tests and measurements to effectively diagnose and treat depression. One commonly used tool to measure depression is the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale or HDRS.
Summarize selected articles The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale was created to help determine patient levels of depression. The information collected was used during, before or after a patient’s treatment. According to (Bagby &.Ryder, 2004) “The author’s tries to determine whether continued use of the Hamilton Rating Scale is justifiable.” Since the scale was originally developed in the 1950’s to assess it’s effectiveness on antidepressents, it became a common tool for clinicians to measure the depression. Medline’s research was done to provide reviews from the Hamilton Scales last major evaluation that measured psychometrics properties. Hamilton’s rating scales were reliable and adequate, but; many scale items seemed to be poor contributors when measuring depression and its severity. The test was grouped into major basis of psychometric properties. The properties examined were, item-response characteristics, validity, and reliability.” Medline reviewed and researched seventy studies that were published for both depression and Hamilton. According to (Bagby &.Ryder, 2004) “Evidence suggests that the Hamilton depression scale is psychometrically and conceptually flawed. The breadth and severity of the problems militate against efforts to revise the current instrument.” Although there is a need for improvement, the authors ability to provide it’s readers with results helped conclude that for over more than twenty years, the Hamilton rating scale only met some of the selection criteria. The significant development in psychometric theory are now seen in a new light. Clinicians and psychologists are revisiting, revising, and rejecting arguments, because; of it’s need to apply instruments to research that is currently being used.
Another article researched, discussed how the Hamilton Depression Scale was used to observe latent trajectory classes in reaction to therapy and if the scale limits the results of medication in opposition to psychotherapy. In this article, a method was developed that used the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and discovered a result. The method was used by information that originated from a full year trial of two-hundred and sixty-seven youth, minorities, and women with low-income. Each individual had major depression symptoms which lead to cognitive-behavioral therapy, antidepressants, with recommendations to particular mental health facilities. In order for researchers to establish the discrepancy effects of the medications, cognitive-behavioral therapy, growth mixture and modeling was applied. Depressions were calculated by means of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. As a result, this examination acknowledged two latent trajectory classes. “The first was characterized by severe depression at baseline and the second class was characterized by moderate depression and anxiety at baseline. Among women with severe depression, there was no significant treatment group difference at six months, but cognitive-behavioral therapy was superior to medication at one year” (Siddique, Chung, & Brown, 2012).
Compare and Contrast For more than 40 years, the Hamilton Rating Scale has been used for making assessments of depression. Both studies are markedly limited. Although, the Hamilton Rating Scale is popular, it is poor at distinguishing amongst depression and generalized anxiety disorder. For example, test’s administered by clinicians can easily influence the patient, with bias questions which can result to negative outcomes of treatments. Each method measured different types of criteria, but; both measured the effectiveness of antidepressants used by his or her patients. The first article was based on past research that needed to be re-evaluated because of poor sample replications. The article also reviewed issues that were related to the development of this scale, its short comings and continued use. Conclusions were based off past research that needed to be re-evaluated. With any disorder, when doing research, reliability is critical when trying to measure valid results. The second article, of the one year trials of two-hundred sixty -seven youths from low income areas were assessed for depression. The Hamilton Rating scale determined these youths as major depressive. The research done, assessed discrepancy effects from medications and the effect it has on individuals. These symptoms led to, cognitive behavioral therapy, anti-depressants, and mental facilities. Some depression scale items used, measure single symptoms whereas others research somatic symptom items.. Although each article measured incomparable data, researchers who used the Hamilton Rating Scale, proved that the scale was essential in psychological testing.
Use of Hamilton Depression Scale
Max Hamilton initially announced the depression scale in 1960 and reviewed and reexamined it in 1966, 1967, 1969, and 1980. The Hamilton Depression Scale (also shortened as HDS, HAMD, or HAD) is a depression assessment assessing the seriousness of the clinical depression signs (Hamilton Depression Scale, 2007). According to Hamilton, the Hamilton Depression Scale should be administered by a clinician competent in working with psychiatric patients due to the complexity of the analysis of clinical terms (Hamilton Depression Scale, 2007-2011). The test can be administered to adults, teens and children. HDS is a customary extent of the depression used in studies and for the assessment of the efficiency of depression rehabilitations and cures. The HDS is used to calculate the depressive severity indicators present in both adult individuals and children. The Hamilton Depression Scale is frequently used as a common scale that measures depression in assessments of antidepressant psychotropic treatments and is a typical tool that measures depression used in studies of the usefulness of rehabilitations for depression along with antidotes. The Hamilton Depression Scale controlled by earlier use of medication and thereafter with follow-up appointments, so that doses of medications will be altered partly based on the patient's assessment rating. The Hamilton Depression Scale is frequently used a typical measure against other depression measurements that are validated.
Populations, Differential Item Functioning, and Validity
In psychological testing and measurements, an entire set of individuals to which generalizations are made based on an experimental sample represents a population. A population sample is comprised of one or more preselected factors, such as one’s age, parentage, race, socioeconomic status, biological factors, or gender. The validity of a psychological test is strengthened when it measures what it is intended to measure, as well as administered to individuals of a particular population to which the specific test is most suitable. Specifically, the HDRS is effective for measuring depression in both children and adults. In consideration to the differences between adolescent and adult depressive symptoms, the HDRS provides more than one version to accommodate a more accurate and precise measurements for individuals of different age populations or developmental stages. For example, isolation and withdrawal are common symptoms manifested in adults with depression, whereas hyperactivity and disruptive behavior are a more common manifestation of depression in children. When responses differ according to one’s group membership or population differential item functioning can exist by creating bias and inaccurate results. Noting symptoms of depression in adults hallmark solely to childhood depression and vice versa, is an example of differential item functioning. Differential item function can also vary within the adult population. Since the HDRS is an interviewer-rated test measuring the severity of depression, individuals with impaired cognitive abilities, as noted in stroke patients, will have marked differential item functioning due to severe aphasia or other cognitive dysfunction (Aben & Verhey, 2002). Although the HDSR serves the purpose of measuring depression in adult populations, without acknowledging the differential item functioning of one’s cognitive abilities and providing test variations to accommodate these differences the results are invalid (Aben & Verhey, 2002).
Conclusion
Subjectively, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale is a widely used test among professionals to measure depression before, during, and after therapy initiation. Although the HDRS is a useful tool to improve depression therapies, when the HDRS is administered without regard to differential item functioning the results are inaccurate, making the test invalid. With any psychological test there are limitations. Limitations can include an individual’s ability to communicate to the interviewer effectively or the interviewer misinterpreting information. When administering the HDRS solely by psychological professionals, giving careful consideration to the population the test is administered to, and applying the measurements appropriately in regards to therapy, the more likely an individual’s symptoms are controlled and he or she can begin to live a better a quality of life. References
Aben, I., Verhey, F., Lousberg, R., Lodder, J., & Honig, A. (2002). Validity of the beck depression inventory, hospital anxiety and depression scale, SCL-90, and hamilton depression rating scale as screening instruments for depression in stroke patients. Psychosomatics, 43(5), 386-93. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/220323670?accountid=35812
Bagby, R., Michael, Ryder, G, Andrew, Schuller, R, Deborah, Marshall, B, Margarita (2004, December). The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: Has the Gold Standard Become a Lead Weight? Retrieved from http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleID=177207#Abstract

Hamilton Depression Scale. (2007-2011). Retrieved from http://www.real-depression-help.com/hamilton-depression-scale.html

Hamilton Depression Scale. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.minddisorders.com/Flu-Inv/Hamilton-Depression-Scale.html
Siddique, J., Chung, J.Y., & Brown, C.H. (2012, December). Comparative effectiveness of medicationversus cognitive-behavioral therapy in a randomized controlled trial of low- income young minoritywomen with depression.. EBSCOhost, 80(6), 995-1006.
doi:10.1037/a0030452