Hamilton Depression Rating Scale Case Study
Hamilton depression rating scale
Psychometric evaluation was carried out using 17 items of the Hamilton Depression Scale. It is a clinician-administered scale that assesses the severity of depression. A score of 8 or lower is considered to reflect an asymptomatic state, with an increasing continuum of symptom severity as scores increase (Hamilton, 1967; Lotfy, 1994).
The young mania rating scale
The Young Mania Rating Scale is an 11-item clinician-administered scale used to measure the severity of mania. Each item is rated on the basis of the individual's subjective report over the previous 48 h, as well as on the behavioral observations of the clinician. The rating of each item is on a scale of 0-4 (absent to overtly present), except for …show more content…
As such, the WCST can be considered a measure of 'executive functions', involving the ability to develop and maintain an appropriate problem-solving strategy across changing stimulus conditions to achieve a future goal. It also requires strategic planning, organized searching, and modulating impulsive responding. Perseverative errors on the WCST are indicators of deficits in cognitive set shifting (which is hypothesized to implement features of a replanning strategy, such as task-set activation and inhibition) and mental flexibility (ability to reconfigure the cognitive system to meet shifting task demands), whereas nonperseverative errors are indicators of deficits in generalized reasoning. Abilities like concept formation (the requirement to identify the abstract or conceptual relationships shared by stimuli) are measured by the number of categories achieved on the WCST. Data suggest that abnormalities in those frontal systems that are likely to mediate abstract concept formation may be related to the degree of familial loading for psychotic disorders (Berg, 1948; Heaton et al., 1993; Sullivan et al., 1993; Kongs et al., 2000; Kohli and Kaur, …show more content…
Qualitative data were described using number and percentage. Quantitative data were described using range (minimum and maximum), mean, SD, and median. Comparison between different groups regarding categorical variables was tested using the χ2 -test. When more than 20% of the cells have an expected count less than 5, correction for χ2 was conducted using Fisher's exact test or Monte Carlo correction. The distributions of quantitative variables were tested for normality using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, the Shapiro-Wilk test, and the D'Agostino test. Histograms and QQ plots were used for vision test. In the case of normal data distribution, parametric tests were applied. If the data were abnormally distributed, nonparametric tests were used. For normally distributed data, comparison between the three studied groups was made using the F-test (ANOVA) and post-hoc test (Scheffe). For abnormally distributed data, comparison between two independent populations was made using the Mann-Whitney U-test, whereas the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare between different groups and pairwise comparison was made using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Significance of the obtained results was judged at the 5% level (Kotz et al., 2006; Kirkpatrick and Feeney,
Psychometric evaluation was carried out using 17 items of the Hamilton Depression Scale. It is a clinician-administered scale that assesses the severity of depression. A score of 8 or lower is considered to reflect an asymptomatic state, with an increasing continuum of symptom severity as scores increase (Hamilton, 1967; Lotfy, 1994).
The young mania rating scale
The Young Mania Rating Scale is an 11-item clinician-administered scale used to measure the severity of mania. Each item is rated on the basis of the individual's subjective report over the previous 48 h, as well as on the behavioral observations of the clinician. The rating of each item is on a scale of 0-4 (absent to overtly present), except for …show more content…
As such, the WCST can be considered a measure of 'executive functions', involving the ability to develop and maintain an appropriate problem-solving strategy across changing stimulus conditions to achieve a future goal. It also requires strategic planning, organized searching, and modulating impulsive responding. Perseverative errors on the WCST are indicators of deficits in cognitive set shifting (which is hypothesized to implement features of a replanning strategy, such as task-set activation and inhibition) and mental flexibility (ability to reconfigure the cognitive system to meet shifting task demands), whereas nonperseverative errors are indicators of deficits in generalized reasoning. Abilities like concept formation (the requirement to identify the abstract or conceptual relationships shared by stimuli) are measured by the number of categories achieved on the WCST. Data suggest that abnormalities in those frontal systems that are likely to mediate abstract concept formation may be related to the degree of familial loading for psychotic disorders (Berg, 1948; Heaton et al., 1993; Sullivan et al., 1993; Kongs et al., 2000; Kohli and Kaur, …show more content…
Qualitative data were described using number and percentage. Quantitative data were described using range (minimum and maximum), mean, SD, and median. Comparison between different groups regarding categorical variables was tested using the χ2 -test. When more than 20% of the cells have an expected count less than 5, correction for χ2 was conducted using Fisher's exact test or Monte Carlo correction. The distributions of quantitative variables were tested for normality using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, the Shapiro-Wilk test, and the D'Agostino test. Histograms and QQ plots were used for vision test. In the case of normal data distribution, parametric tests were applied. If the data were abnormally distributed, nonparametric tests were used. For normally distributed data, comparison between the three studied groups was made using the F-test (ANOVA) and post-hoc test (Scheffe). For abnormally distributed data, comparison between two independent populations was made using the Mann-Whitney U-test, whereas the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare between different groups and pairwise comparison was made using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Significance of the obtained results was judged at the 5% level (Kotz et al., 2006; Kirkpatrick and Feeney,