Assessment of Life Stress in Adolescents: Self-Report Versus Interview Methods

• NCJ Number: 182147
• Journal: Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Volume: 39 Issue: 4 Dated: April 2000 Pages: 445-452
• Author(s): Sunita Duggal Ph.D.; Susan Malkoff-Schwartz Ph.D.; Boris Birmaher M.D.; Barbara P. Anderson Ph.D.; Mary K. Matty B.S.; Patricia R. Houck MSH; Meredith Bailey-Orr M.A.; Douglas E. Williamson Ph.D.; Ellen Frank Ph.D.
• Date Published: April 2000
• Length: 8 pages
• Grant Number(s): MH-30915
• Sponsoring Agency: John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; National Institute of Mental Health
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study compared the investigator-based Life Events and Difficulties Schedule (LEDS) with a self-report measure (Life Events Checklist [LEC]) for the purpose of measuring life stress in adolescents with and without a diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD).

Abstract

Adolescents (aged 13-18 years) with a recent episode of MDD based on DSM-III-R (n=35) and normal controls free of any Axis I lifetime psychiatric disorder (n=35) were assessed using both the LEC and the LEDS. Findings show that both measures predicted membership in the depressed and nondepressed groups of adolescents. Adolescents in the depressed group were more likely to report a severe event on the LEDS (97 percent) than adolescents in the nondepressed group (66 percent) (p=.001). Similarly, subjects in the depressed group endorsed a greater number of negative events (mean=8.1) on the LEC than subjects in the nondepressed group (mean=3.0) (p=.0001). An examination of potential provoking agents for episodes of major depression revealed that the LEC captured only 32 percent or pre-onset severe events and 36 percent of pre-onset major difficulties identified by the LEDS. Interpreted in the context of relative advantages and disadvantages, the results suggest that checklist and interview measures each have distinct advantages, depending on the purpose for which they are being used. 2 tables, 1 figure, and 28 references