TY - JOUR
T1 - Validity of the GDS-4 revisited
AU - Cheng, Sheung-Tak
AU - Chan, Alfred C. M.
PY - 2008/10
Y1 - 2008/10
N2 - 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. © 2008 Taylor & Francis.
AB - 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. © 2008 Taylor & Francis.
KW - Chinese
KW - Geriatric depression scale
KW - Psychometric properties
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=54349089180&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.scopus.com/record/pubmetrics.uri?eid=2-s2.0-54349089180&origin=recordpage
U2 - 10.1080/13548500801932402
DO - 10.1080/13548500801932402
M3 - RGC 21 - Publication in refereed journal
C2 - 18942016
SN - 1354-8506
VL - 13
SP - 621
EP - 626
JO - Psychology, Health and Medicine
JF - Psychology, Health and Medicine
IS - 5
ER -