10 Technical Quality Alexus Forbes Beck Depression Inventory-11 (BDI-11) According to Wang

Technical Quality
Alexus Forbes
Beck Depression Inventory-11 (BDI-11)
According to Wang and Gorenstein, Beck Depression Inventory-11 can be used as a psychometric tool to measure depression in various situations and populace (2013). Unlike other versions of the Beck Depression Inventory, BDI-11 has no particular theory that addresses depression. The articles related to this test are Gorenstein, Andrade, Zanolo & Artes, 2005; & Koku, 2016).
Reliability of the Article
The article addresses validity instead of reliability because no applicable summary of BDI-11 has been conducted despite its use in clinical and nonclinical studies. The based report shows an overview of the subject matter instead of a systematic review of the usefulness of BDI-11 when dealing with depression in different populations. Also, 25% of the articles used when assessing depression using BDI-11 did not show a reliability correlation. General assumptions about the test scores of the psychometric tool do not offer its efficiency in clinical usefulness. Despite its ability to assess different forms of depression compared to other forms of BDI, its preeminence does not indicate any progress regarding the legitimacy of the scale (Gorenstein, Andrade, Zanolo & Artes, 2005).
Validity of the Article
The validity of the article is based on the content and latent construct of BDI-11. Content focuses on factor analysis, while latent focuses on types, categories, and behavior of traits of the items used. The content validity of BDI-11 appears to be adequate than its former version. Content validity relies on the qualitative representation of the quality to be measured; hence should not be used alone when treating depression. Although BDI-11 does not rely on theories to explain its workings, factor analysis is often used to assess the seriousness of depressive symptoms in a patient. Bias from the studies results from distortion in tests produced that receive gold scores during verification. Inconsistency can be avoided by considering differences when interpreting test scores; hence future changes should allow a measurable analysis of data collected to evaluate scores resulting from the scale error.
Error Variance
Measurement error can be presented from the time length of the scores. The scores time is larger than the error of the test scores because of item heterogeneity and content captured by cross-sectional internal uniformity. BDI-11 could tell the differences between all forms of depression ranging from less severe to serious ones. The report shows that medical practitioners should be careful when making treatment decisions based on data collected from BDI-11 since fluctuations in test scores resulted from effects from the measurement of the score test.
Type of Reliability
The article addresses retest reliability that showed relative stability by reapplying BDI-11, and it showed coefficients ranging from good to excellent within a range of six months. Interpretation of the retest reliability was based on two findings. First, a high correlation of the retest reliability of the BDI-11 can be seen after either a short or long interval time to show if depression can occur without any involvement and vice versa. The second finding shows that comparing BDI-1 and BDI-11 retest coefficient is only efficient when the two psychometric instruments are done simultaneously. Hence, there is no available retest information for psychiatric or medical patients (Koku, 2016).
Overall Results
Findings from the article show that allocating nonclinical participants without involvement is based on a monthly, weekly, and mid-monthly interval. Test scores were low from weekly administration. The text indicates that low retest scores were caused by scores measurement and frequency of test administration. On the other hand, re-administering the test in a clinical setting would be difficult because low scores result without intervention with patients exhibiting severe depression.
Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS)
The articles related to this text are Balsamo, Carlucci, Innamorati, Lester, & Pompili, 2020; & Satorres et.al, 2018; & Kliem, Lohmann, Mößle, Brähler, 2018.
Reliability of the Article
Beck Hopelessness Scale shows some limitations, which make the scale not reliable. The exclusion of some items from analysis resulted in inconsistency due to missing data. The model also offered a huge number of data that is just put into the scale without really confirming its reliability source hence making it have to rely on the data. It does not ensure whether the data is true since findings are removed from continuous data that may not be true (Balsamo, Carlucci, Innamorati, Lester, & Pompili, 2020).
Validity of the Article
To test the validity of the Beck Hopelessness Scale, a population of Spanish descent was selected with an age group of 60 years and above. This population age group is aware of how long they will live, and how they respond to that fact was positive. The positive outcome shows that they have a good idea of their future expectations that are not overrated, hence showing no lack of motivation for their future.BHS is a good scale for assessing hopelessness among older adults of Spanish descent. However, problems were seen with scale. When issues are removed, the scale becomes more consistent and increases the structures of the factors of hopelessness. There is no explanation to show why the scale does not fit to be used in outpatients that show no signs of mental challenges and symptoms of depression (Satorres et.al, 2018)
Error Variance
BHS included true or false items to assess factors of hopelessness. Factors like patients’ loss of motivation, feelings about the future, and expectations are put on a scale to test suicidal attempts in inpatient and outpatient. The results showed greater hopelessness if the score was high. Low scores indicated that there were common signs of distress in a patient. This state can cause errors during measurement due to factors like a patient’s personality. Basing conclusions using a true and false scale can lead to mistakes and term the scaling invalid since the results are not conclusive. The scale is then be corrected by adjusting the scale to include one-dimensional measures that are short and reliable.
Type of Variability
Beck Hopelessness Scale uses a predictive validity because the BHS test scores between clinical and nonclinical samples show a strong correlation. BHS predicted suicidal thoughts among psychiatric patients hospitalized after being discharged in six months. The study group was youths. The scale also predicted that suicidal thoughts among children came on the first day of hospital admission. So, BHS can be used to study samples for both hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients to show their social life and health in general. Prediction for hopelessness is based on factors like low motivation, future feelings, and expectations. Only one factor, “loss of motivation,” was related to suicidal thoughts among the study population. Findings show that when both elements are combined, the predictive validity for BHS goes down (Kliem, Lohmann, Mößle, Brähler, 2018).
Overall Results
Following the number of tests that have been performed on the Beck Hopelessness Scale on different patients, conclusions from the scale can be used on psychiatric patients. The scale showed assumptions about independence, monotony in items of test, and invariability. These factors deem to be an excellent test on psychiatric patients. Its nature of being less predictive is a good sign that the scale works on weak patients. The scale also provides reliable and valid results for older adults in the Spanish population, showing that it could be useful in clinical research to test and curb cases of suicidal behaviors.
Children’s Depression Inventory -2 (CDI 2)
The articles related to this text include the following; Bae, 2012; Kim, Lee, Hwang, Hong, & Kim, 2018; & De la Vega et.al, 2016
Reliability of the article
The article can be purported not to be reliable since no test-retest reliability between parent and teacher was conducted on Children’s Depression Inventory-2, making the test less reliable (Bae, 2012). Similarly, all CDI 2 forms showed high levels of inconsistency in internal data for all ages and sex. CDI 2 uses estimates attributes that are not reliable instead of using stable attributes.
Validity of the article
Concurrent validity shows that there is a strong correlation between Children Depression Inventory and Youth Self Report. When factors like anxiousness, withdrawal symptoms, and social problems are some of the factors that are correlated among children and youths, on the other hand, rule-breaking behavior and aggression behaviors are not connected among kids and children. Children tend to exhibit less severe symptoms of depression than youths. Children are often afraid to act out and are guilty, especially when they do something, so they are conscious whenever making judgments. Juveniles act out to a very large extent since they are carefree and do not think about consequences. Children’s Depression Inventory-2 can treat depression in youths to some time but not fully recommend the test as a treatment plan for adults. Children can benefit from this method since it suits all factors under study. (Kim, Lee, Hwang, Hong, & Kim, 2018)
Evidence of Validity
Both moderate and positive correlations showed the validity of the CDI scores with pain intensity. The scores also indicate a negative correlation with psychological factors. The article suggests that the test applies in certain scenarios but does not work in all situations (De la Vega et.al, 2016). Depression among youths can be controlled and avoided in time using CDI 2 scale, considering that all factors are put in place. The test can also fail if the scale uses one attribute to treat patients in general. Patients’ characteristics should be looked into individually by understanding the cause of the depression issues and their culture. Also, up bring should also be considered in the test scale measurement to ensure that such factor is measured and not overlooked. It is advisable to conduct future research before deciding regarding items to be put on the scale to test the validity and reliability of the psychometric tests.
Type of reliability
Children Depression Inventory-2 shows test-retest reliability, which offers consistency in scores of multiple items conducted over a certain period. Test scores were put under understudy for four weeks, and data collected from parents and teachers. They showed a correlation in response to factors that cause depression among adolescent kids. Similarly, the article also displays inter-rater reliability, showing high consistency when tests are conducted in the same manner. However, the original CDI-2 compared of the latest version of CDI, there is a strong correlation among the studies between parent and teacher reports when the study report is low.
Overall results
Features of CDI 2, like emotional and functional problems like age and sex, agree with the theoretical part of depression among youths. CDI 2 target group can be peers, schools, and parents, making it a reliable test for targeting depression symptoms. Descriptive validity can also be displayed in breaking down specific samples used for diagnosis. A high level of reliability shows that CDI 2 is appropriate when used in schools. The model used in the survey should be bias-free by not putting a certain age group of the population since it leads to inaccurate results.
Balsamo, M., Carlucci, L., Innamorati, M., Lester, D., & Pompili, M. (2020). Further insights into the Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS): unidimensionality among psychiatric inpatients. Frontiers in psychiatry, 11. https://dx.doi.org/10.3389fpsyt.2020.00727
Bae, Y. (2012). Test review: children’s depression inventory 2 (CDI 2). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. 30(3), 304-308. https://doi.org/10.11770734282911426407
De la Vega, R., Racine, M., Sánchez-Rodríguez, E., Solé, E., Castarlenas, E., Jensen, M. P., & Miró, J. (2016). Psychometric properties of the short form of the Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI-S) in young people with physical disabilities. Journal of psychosomatic research, 90, 57-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2016.09.007
Gorenstein, C., Andrade, L., Zanolo, E., & Artes, R. (2005). Expression of Depressive Symptoms in a Nonclinical Brazilian Adolescent Sample. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 50(3), 129–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370505000301
Koku, G.J. (2016).Beck Depression Inventory. Occupational Medicine, 66(2), 174–175, https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqv087
Kim, H. J., Lee, E. H., Hwang, S. T., Hong, S. H., & Kim, J. H. (2018). Psychometric properties of the Children’s Depression Inventory-2 among a community-based sample of Korean children and adolescents. Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology, 37(2), 177-186.
Kliem, S., Lohmann, A., Moble,T., & Brahler, E.(2018). Psychometric properties and measurement invariance of the Beck hopelessness scale (BHS): results from a German representative population sample. BMC Psychiatry, 18(1), 110. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1646-6
Satorres, E., Ros, L., Meléndez, J. C., Serrano, J. P., Latorre, J. M., & Sales, A. (2018). I am measuring elderly people’s quality of life through the Beck Hopelessness Scale: a study with a Spanish sample. Aging & mental health, 22(2), 239-244. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2016.1247427
Wang,Y.P., & Gorenstein, C. (2013). Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory-11: a comprehensive review. Brazilian Journal of Psychiatry, 35(4), 416-431. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-4446-2012-1048