Premium
The Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS): its development, validation and utility
Author(s) -
Berk Michael,
Malhi Gin S,
Cahill Catherine,
Carman A Catherine,
HadziPavlovic Dusan,
Hawkins Mary T,
Tohen Mauricio,
Mitchell Philip B
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
bipolar disorders
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.285
H-Index - 129
eISSN - 1399-5618
pISSN - 1398-5647
DOI - 10.1111/j.1399-5618.2007.00536.x
Subject(s) - young mania rating scale , psychology , rating scale , bipolar disorder , montgomery–åsberg depression rating scale , clinical psychology , cronbach's alpha , depression (economics) , psychiatry , construct validity , mania , psychometrics , mood , major depressive disorder , developmental psychology , economics , macroeconomics
Objectives: Unipolar and bipolar depression differ neurobiologically and in clinical presentation. Existing depression rating instruments, used in bipolar depression, fail to capture the necessary phenomenological nuances, as they are based on and skewed towards the characteristics of unipolar depression. Both clinically and in research there is a growing need for a new observer‐rated scale that is specifically designed to assess bipolar depression. Methods: An instrument reflecting the characteristics of bipolar depression was drafted by the authors, and administered to 122 participants aged 18–65 (44 males and 78 females) with a diagnosis of DSM‐IV bipolar disorder, who were currently experiencing symptoms of depression. The Bipolar Depression Rating Scale (BDRS) was administered together with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM‐D), Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Results: The BDRS has strong internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.917), and robust correlation coefficients with the MADRS (r = 0.906) and HAM‐D (r = 0.744), and the mixed subscale correlated with the YMRS (r = 0.757). Exploratory factor analysis showed a three‐factor solution gave the best account of the data. These factors corresponded to depression (somatic), depression (psychological) and mixed symptom clusters. Conclusions: This study provides evidence for the validity of the BDRS for the measurement of depression in bipolar disorder. These results suggest good internal validity, provisional evidence of inter‐rater reliability and strong correlations with other depression rating scales.