BACKGROUND Differentiating melancholic and non-melancholic depressive disorders and evaluating whether they differ categorically or dimensionally has had a lengthy history, but has not previously been evaluated in a non-clinical adolescent sample. METHODS We studied a sample of 1579 senior high school students and evaluated the capacity of the Sydney Melancholia Prototype Index (SMPI) to differentiate melancholic from non-melancholic depression, both using a 'top down' strategy of imposing a pre-established cut-off score and a 'bottom up' strategy of employing latent class analyses. RESULTS The two strategies respectively generated prevalence figures of 3.4% and 8.1% of the students having experienced a melancholic depressive episode and with the difference reflecting the LCA assigning some students who did not reach the pre-established cut-off score for the SMPI in the putative melancholic class. The principal latent class analysis failed to generate pristine melancholic and non-melancholic depressive classes, in that it also generated an 'intermediate' as well as a non-clinical depressive class. Both SMPI strategies identified similar symptoms-such as anhedonia and anergia-and several illness correlates that best differentiated those assigned melancholia status, and both strategies confirmed melancholia assignment being associated with factors indicative of more severe depressive disorders and of likely melancholic depression. LIMITATIONS Data were assessed by self-report only, only lifetime depression was assessed, and no other depressive diagnostic validating measure was administered. CONCLUSIONS The SMPI appears capable of identifying and differentiating melancholic from non-melancholic depression in a non-clinical adolescent sample.

中文翻译：

---

在非临床样品中鉴定和区分忧郁症抑郁症。

背景技术区分忧郁症和非忧郁症性抑郁症并评估其在分类上或在维度上是否不同已有很长的历史，但以前尚未在非临床青少年样本中进行评估。方法我们研究了1579名高中生的样本，并评估了悉尼忧郁症原型指数（SMPI）区分忧郁症和非忧郁症抑郁症的能力，两者均采用“自上而下”的方法设定了预先设定的临界值得分和采用潜在类别分析的“自下而上”策略。结果两种策略的患病率分别为3.4％和8。1％经历过忧郁症抑郁发作的学生，差异反映出LCA分配了一些在推定的忧郁症班级中未达到SMPI预先设定的截止分数的学生。主要潜在类别分析未能产生原始的忧郁和非忧郁性抑郁症，因为它还产生了“中级”和非临床性抑郁症类别。两种SMPI策略均识别出相似的症状（如无力状态和无痛状态），并且几种疾病相关性最好地区分了那些患有忧郁症的人，并且两种策略都证实忧郁症的归因与指示更严重的抑郁症和可能的忧郁症抑郁症的因素有关。局限性数据仅通过自我报告进行评估，仅评估了终生抑郁症，未进行其他抑郁症诊断验证措施。结论SMPI似乎能够识别和区分非临床青少年样本中的忧郁症抑郁症与非忧郁症抑郁症。