95 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18986657)
1. Reliability and validity of the telephone-based version of the Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale for assessing depression in individuals with primary brain tumour.
Harris G; Jones S; Pinkham MB; Lion KM; Ownsworth T
Disabil Rehabil; 2024 Mar; 46(6):1158-1166. PubMed ID: 37021336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Application and value of anxiety and depression scale in patients with functional dyspepsia.
Ruan Y; Lin H; Lu X; Lin Y; Sun J; Xu C; Zhou L; Cai Z; Chen X
BMC Psychol; 2024 Apr; 12(1):244. PubMed ID: 38689345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Machine learning algorithm-based estimation model for the severity of depression assessed using Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale.
Shimamoto M; Ishizuka K; Ohtani K; Inada T; Yamamoto M; Tachibana M; Kimura H; Sakai Y; Kobayashi K; Ozaki N; Ikeda M
Neuropsychopharmacol Rep; 2024 Mar; 44(1):115-120. PubMed ID: 38115795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression: The making of a "gold standard" and the unmaking of a chronic illness, 1960-1980.
Worboys M
Chronic Illn; 2013 Sep; 9(3):202-19. PubMed ID: 23172888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Determining optimal parameters of the self-referent encoding task: A large-scale examination of self-referent cognition and depression.
Dainer-Best J; Lee HY; Shumake JD; Yeager DS; Beevers CG
Psychol Assess; 2018 Nov; 30(11):1527-1540. PubMed ID: 29878818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. One consensual depression diagnosis tool to serve many countries: a challenge! A RAND/UCLA methodology.
Nabbe P; Le Reste JY; Guillou-Landreat M; Beck-Robert E; Assenova R; Lazic D; Czachowski S; Stojanović-Špehar S; Hasanagic M; Lingner H; Clavería A; Fernandez San Martin MI; Sowinska A; Argyriadou S; Lygidakis C; Le Floch B; Doerr C; Montier T; Van Marwijk H; Van Royen P
BMC Res Notes; 2018 Jan; 11(1):4. PubMed ID: 29298721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Analysis of Automated Clinical Depression Diagnosis in a Chinese Corpus.
Mao K; Wang DB; Zheng T; Jiao R; Zhu Y; Wu B; Qian L; Lyu W; Chen J; Ye M
IEEE Trans Biomed Circuits Syst; 2023 Oct; 17(5):1135-1152. PubMed ID: 37399151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An automated approach for predicting HAMD-17 scores via divergent selective focused multi-heads self-attention network.
Qin J; Qin Z; Qin Z; Li F; Peng Y; Zhang Y; Yao Y
Brain Res Bull; 2024 Jul; 213():110984. PubMed ID: 38806119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Neuropsychiatric clinical trials: should they accommodate real-world practices or set standards for clinical practices?
Becker RE; Greig NH
J Clin Psychopharmacol; 2009 Feb; 29(1):56-64. PubMed ID: 19142109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Statistical Analysis for Rating Scale in Clinical Trials.
Shi M; Chow SC
Ther Innov Regul Sci; 2024 Jun; ():. PubMed ID: 38877300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Minimal detectable change of gait and balance measures in older neurological patients: estimating the standard error of the measurement from before-after rehabilitation data thanks to the linear mixed-effects models.
Caronni A; Picardi M; Scarano S; Rota V; Guidali G; Bolognini N; Corbo M
J Neuroeng Rehabil; 2024 Apr; 21(1):44. PubMed ID: 38566189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A Cross-Sectional Study of Psychological Status in Different Epidemic Areas in China After the COVID-19 Outbreak.
Cao H; Zuo C; Li G; Huang Y; Li L; Huang S; Zhao J; Liu J; Jiang Y; Wang F
Front Psychiatry; 2020; 11():575705. PubMed ID: 33250791
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Validation of the Excited Component of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS-EC) in a naturalistic sample of 278 patients with acute psychosis and agitation in a psychiatric emergency room.
Montoya A; Valladares A; Lizán L; San L; Escobar R; Paz S
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2011 Mar; 9():18. PubMed ID: 21447155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Using longitudinal data from a clinical trial in depression to assess the reliability of its outcome scales.
Laenen A; Alonso A; Molenberghs G; Vangeneugden T; Mallinckrodt CH
J Psychiatr Res; 2009 Apr; 43(7):730-8. PubMed ID: 18986657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparative meta-analysis of Clinical Global Impressions change in antidepressant trials.
Spielmans GI; McFall JP
J Nerv Ment Dis; 2006 Nov; 194(11):845-52. PubMed ID: 17102709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Relationship between the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale in depressed elderly: a meta-analysis.
Heo M; Murphy CF; Meyers BS
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry; 2007 Oct; 15(10):899-905. PubMed ID: 17911366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Derivation of a definition of remission on the Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale corresponding to the definition of remission on the Hamilton rating scale for depression.
Zimmerman M; Posternak MA; Chelminski I
J Psychiatr Res; 2004; 38(6):577-82. PubMed ID: 15458853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Modelling placebo response in depression trials using a longitudinal model with informative dropout.
Gomeni R; Lavergne A; Merlo-Pich E
Eur J Pharm Sci; 2009 Jan; 36(1):4-10. PubMed ID: 19041717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Atypical depression. A valid clinical entity?
Stewart JW; McGrath PJ; Rabkin JG; Quitkin FM
Psychiatr Clin North Am; 1993 Sep; 16(3):479-95. PubMed ID: 8415233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
