Validity of the GDS-4 revisited
Document Type
Journal article
Source Publication
Psychology, Health and Medicine
Publication Date
10-1-2008
Volume
13
Issue
5
First Page
621
Last Page
626
Keywords
Chinese, Geriatric depression scale, Psychometric properties
Abstract
This article points out several flaws in an earlier article (Chau, Martin, Thompson, Chang, & Woo, 2006). We note that Chau, Martin, Thompson, Chang, and Woo (2006) had misquoted our work on a 4-item version of the geriatric depression scale (GDS), and the work of the research team, which developed the original 30-item and 15-item versions of the scale. Furthermore, their data analytic methods were flawed, and their conclusions were often not supported by the data they presented. On the basis of these observations, we found no evidence against the use of the 4-item version of the GDS.
DOI
10.1080/13548500801932402
Print ISSN
13548506
E-ISSN
14653966
Publisher Statement
Copyright © 2008 Taylor & Francis
Access to external full text or publisher's version may require subscription.
Full-text Version
Publisher’s Version
Language
English
Recommended Citation
Cheng, S.-T., & Chan, A. C. M. (2008). Validity of the GDS-4 revisited. Psychology, Health and Medicine, 13(5), 621-626. doi: 10.1080/13548500801932402