This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Correction  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Robert T. Rubin, MD, Phd
Department of Psychiatry Harbor-UCLA Medical Center 1000 W Carson Street Torrance, CA 90509

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1987;44(4):390.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

In the March 1986 issue of the ARCHIVES, Zimmerman et al¹ attempted to "validate" four definitions of endogenous depression (DSM-III melancholia and Newcastle, Feinberg-Carroll, and Research Diagnostic Criteria endogenous depression) by examining which of several predicted correlates of endogenous depression were related to each of the four definitions in 152 patients with major depressive disorder. Included were demographic, family-history, social, psychological, biological, and treatment-response variables. By simply counting up the number of predicted relationships that occurred for each definition, the authors found "some support for the validity of each of the four definitions... the Newcastle scale was the most frequently supported."

Methodologic questions that were both evident in the report and inferrable render the "edge" given to the Newcastle scale quite tenuous. An example of an evident methodologic question is the authors' use of preexisting personality disorder as one of the 13 variables. Not surprisingly, they . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?