ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Development and Initial Validation of a Brief, Online Version of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D): Psychometric Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The moderating effect of depression on social media use and online social support: differential effects on psychological well-being.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Online Social Support - an Adjunct or Substitute for Traditional Social Support: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA growing volume of mental health research is conducted with participants recruited and responding online. However, to date, few psychometric scales have been specifically validated for online research.
objectiveWe aimed to devise a brief, 12-item version of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) in which first order factors are sufficiently measured.
methodsWe recruited 218 adults with depression and 226 comparison participants with no mental health history. Both groups completed the original 20-item CES-D and measures of social support, psychological distress, and sociodemographic information (eg, age, gender, and household income). Measurement of social support included online support, and psychological distress included symptoms of social media use disorder along with loneliness and life dissatisfaction.
resultsThis brief, 12-item version of the CES-D was devised with persons with depression and replicated with comparison participants. For both, core sadness, somatic symptoms, interpersonal detachment, and absence of well-being each significantly contributed to measurement of a higher-order depression latent construct (P<.01). Structural equation modeling was performed to establish the construct validity of this 4-factor model in which depression is predicted by socioeconomic factors and depression predicts lower social support as well as greater psychological distress.
conclusionsResponses to this 12-item, online version of the CES-D demonstrate factorial and construct validity. Clinical research is required in future to ascertain whether scores greater than 11 (of 36) are suggestive of elevated depressive symptomology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.