The authors evaluated whether commonly used cut-points on the 10-item Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D-10) reflect the core affective features expected in older adults who might be experiencing a clinically significant major depressive episode. The CES-D-10 has been used in cohort studies with thresholds of ≥8 and ≥10 to indicate clinically significant symptoms or probable depression. The investigators questioned whether observations crossing those thresholds consistently include depressed mood, a central symptom of major depressive disorder.
This descriptive analysis used repeated CES-D-10 assessments collected in the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly eXTension (ASPREE-XT) longitudinal cohort. The underlying ASPREE trial and ASPREE-XT observational follow-up included a total cohort of 19,114 participants. The dataset spanned up to 13 years of follow-up and provided multiple repeated assessments per participant.
The CES-D-10 is a 10-item self-report screening tool for depressive symptoms. In prior cohort research, researchers have applied sum-score thresholds—commonly ≥8 and ≥10—to indicate clinically significant symptoms or 'probable depression.' The current analysis defined 'probable depression' as a CES-D-10 sum score ≥ 8 for identification of threshold-positive observations.
For each CES-D-10 observation meeting the threshold (CES-D-10 ≥ 8), the investigators examined responses to two specific items intended to capture core affective experience: item 3 ("I felt depressed") and item 8 ("I was happy"). The intent was to determine how frequently threshold-positive observations included minimally depressed mood and concurrently preserved happiness at the item level. The study's primary outcome was the proportion of threshold-positive CES-D-10 observations with minimally depressed mood and preserved happiness.
The analysis focused on the frequency with which observations meeting the CES-D-10 threshold displayed a profile inconsistent with the prototypical depressive affective state—specifically, little or no depressed mood together with retained feelings of happiness. The authors framed this item-level profile as a key marker for potential misclassification when relying on sum scores alone.
Across the 13-year period covered by the ASPREE-XT follow-up, the authors identified 27,417 CES-D-10 observations that met the threshold of CES-D-10 ≥ 8. Of these threshold-positive observations, 13,356 (48.7%) exhibited minimally depressed mood alongside preserved happiness based on responses to item 3 and item 8. The manuscript emphasizes that this represents a substantial proportion of observations that would be labeled 'probable depression' by sum-score criteria yet lack the core depressed affect that is characteristic of major depressive episodes.
The authors conclude that reliance on CES-D-10 sum scores as a proxy for major depressive disorder in older adults can lead to a high rate of observations that lack central affective features of depression. Nearly half of CES-D-10 observations meeting the ≥8 threshold in this large longitudinal older-adult cohort showed little or no depressed mood while retaining happiness. Based on these findings, the authors recommend caution when using CES-D-10 sum scores alone to indicate major depression in older adult populations. They imply that item-level inspection, diagnostic interviews, or additional clinical assessment may be necessary to distinguish true cases of major depressive disorder from elevated symptom scores that do not reflect core depressive affect.
The ASPREE trial and the ASPREE-XT observational follow-up received ethics approvals from relevant institutional review boards and ethics committees at participating sites; primary Australian approvals and multiple secondary approvals are reported. All participants provided informed consent or consent was obtained from appointed surrogates where applicable. Aggregate results are reported in the manuscript; the source states that individual-participant data are not publicly available because of privacy and consent restrictions but may be made available to qualified researchers upon request and approval.
This work is presented as a medRxiv preprint and has not undergone peer review; the authors note that the findings should not be used to guide clinical practice until formally evaluated. The source text did not report additional methodological details such as comparison with structured clinical diagnostic interviews, sensitivity-specificity estimates for thresholds, or subgroup analyses; those details were not reported in the provided manuscript excerpt.