%0 Journal Article
%T Evaluating the psychometric structure of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression pre- and post-treatment in antidepressant randomised trials: Secondary analysis of 6843 individual participants from 20 trials.
%A Byrne D
%A Doyle F
%A Brannick S
%A Carney RM
%A Cuijpers P
%A Dima AL
%A Freedland K
%A Guerin S
%A Hevey D
%A Kathuria B
%A Wallace E
%A Boland F
%J Psychiatry Res
%V 339
%N 0
%D 2024 Sep 25
%M 38943787
%F 11.225
%R 10.1016/j.psychres.2024.116057
%X <B>BACKGROUND: </B>The 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) is the most popular depression measure in antidepressant clinical trials. Prior evidence indicates poor replicability and inconsistent factorial structure. This has not been studied in pooled randomised trial data, nor has a psychometrically optimal model been developed.<BR><B>OBJECTIVE: </B>To examine the psychometric properties of the HRSD-17 for pre-treatment and post-treatment clinical trial data in a large pooled database of antidepressant randomised controlled trial participants, and to determine an optimal abbreviated version.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>Data for 6843 participants were obtained from the data repository Vivli.org and randomly split into groups for exploratory (n = 3421) and confirmatory (n = 3422) factor analysis. Invariance methods were used to assess potential sex differences.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>The HRSD-17 was psychometrically sub-optimal and non-invariant for all models. High item variances and low variance explained suggested redundancy in each model. EFA failed at baseline and produced four item models for outcome groups (five for placebo-outcome), which were metric but not scalar invariant.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>In antidepressant trial data, the HRSD-17 was psychometrically inadequate and scores were not sex invariant. Neither full nor abbreviated HRSD models are suitable for use in clinical trial settings and the HRSD's status as the gold standard should be reconsidered.