Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research · December 1, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Objectives. This study aimed to comprehensively investigate the psychometric properties of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in a sample from Northeast Brazil.Methods. Data were obtained from a cross-sectional study of 303 participants with depressive disorders assessed using the MINI 7.02, MADRS, GAD-7, and ASSIST 3.0. We evaluated reliability, construct validity, convergent and discriminant validity, and diagnostic accuracy.Results. Regarding reliability, the instrument demonstrated robust internal consistency, supported by strong Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients. In terms of construct validity, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) indicated a single-factor solution, while the H-index supported a replicable latent structure. However, formal assessments of closeness to unidimensionality suggested that the scale is not strictly unidimensional. For convergent and discriminant validity, correlational analyses showed a moderate association with anxiety symptoms and weak associations with substance use measures, respectively. Regarding accuracy, ROC curve analysis indicated that a cutoff score of 9 is useful for screening, whereas 18 may better identify a depressive episode.Conclusion. While the MADRS remains a valuable tool, structural refinements could further enhance its psychometric performance across distinct clinical settings.