liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Self-reported versus clinician-rated symptoms of depression as outcome measures in psychotherapy research on depression: A meta-analysis
Vrije University Amsterdam.
Chinese Academy of Science.
Boston University.
Linköping University, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Clinical and Social Psychology. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4753-6745
2010 (English)In: CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, ISSN 0272-7358, Vol. 30, no 6, 768-778 p.Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

It is not well-known whether self-report measures and clinician-rated instruments for depression result in comparable outcomes in research on psychotherapy. We conducted a meta-analysis in which randomized controlled trials were included examining the effects of psychotherapy for adult depression. Only studies were included in which both a self-report and a clinician-rated instrument were used. We calculated the effect size (Hedges g) based on the self-report measures, the effect size based on the clinician-rated instruments, and the difference between these two effect sizes (Delta g). A total of 48 studies including a total of 2462 participants was included in the meta-analysis. The differential effect size was Delta g=0.20 (95% CI: 0.10-0.30), indicating that clinician-rated instruments resulted in a significantly higher effect size than self-report instruments from the same studies. When we limited the effect size analysis to those studies comparing the HRSD with the BDI, the differential effect was somewhat smaller, but still statistically significant (Delta g=0.15; 95% CI: 0.03-0.27). This meta-analysis has made it clear that clinician-rated and self-report measures of improvement following psychotherapy for depression are not equivalent. Different symptoms may be more suitable for self-report or ratings by clinicians and in clinical trials it is probably best to include both.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam. , 2010. Vol. 30, no 6, 768-778 p.
Keyword [en]
Depression, Major depression, Meta-analysis, Self-report, Clinician-rated
National Category
Social Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-58654DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2010.06.001ISI: 000280573600013OAI: diva2:344878
Available from: 2010-08-22 Created: 2010-08-20 Last updated: 2014-11-28

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Andersson, Gerhard
By organisation
Clinical and Social PsychologyFaculty of Arts and Sciences
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 183 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link