If you are in crisis: In crisis? Call or text 988 · Text HOME to 741741 ·
LBL-DEP · v1.0 · Live

A depression screen that sees more than a number.

A validated 9-item self-screen with a symptom profile that surfaces where depression lives — in your thoughts, your body, or your capacity for pleasure.

9 items
5 severity bands
~3 minutes
0 data stored

Developed by Abiot Y. Derbie, PhD — cognitive neuroscientist & founder. Reviewed by Eskezeia Y. Dessie, PhD — clinical reviewer. Browser-local. Nothing transmitted. No accounts. Source-cited methodology.

Kroenke 2001 (9 items)
100,000+ citations
Cronbach α = 0.89
NHS, VA, APA-endorsed
Screen, not diagnosis

Over the last two weeks, how often have you been bothered by each of the following problems? Be honest about typical patterns rather than your worst day or your best day. The instrument is valid only when your answers reflect the rhythm of your life right now.

Item 01 / 09 · pleasure-motivation

Little interest or pleasure in doing things.

Item 02 / 09 · cognitive-emotional

Feeling down, depressed, or hopeless.

Item 03 / 09 · physical / somatic

Trouble falling or staying asleep, or sleeping too much.

Item 04 / 09 · physical / somatic

Feeling tired or having little energy.

Item 05 / 09 · physical / somatic

Poor appetite or overeating.

Item 06 / 09 · cognitive-emotional

Feeling bad about yourself — that you are a failure, or have let yourself or your family down.

Item 07 / 09 · cognitive-emotional

Trouble concentrating on things, such as reading the newspaper or watching television.

Item 08 / 09 · physical / somatic

Moving or speaking so slowly that other people could have noticed — or the opposite, being so fidgety or restless that you have been moving around a lot more than usual.

Item 09 / 09 · self-harm ideation

Thoughts that you would be better off dead, or of hurting yourself in some way.

Functional difficulty · not scored

If you marked any problems above, how difficult have these problems made it for you to do your work, take care of things at home, or get along with other people?

Answer all 9 items to enable
Your results

Severity, profile, and pathways.

Educational decision support. Results are estimates based on the 9-item depression screener (Kroenke 2001) and the documented methodology of this tool. This is a screen, not a diagnosis. Major depressive disorder is diagnosed via DSM-5 or ICD-11 clinical interview by a qualified professional. For decisions about your mental health, consult a clinician.

Severity Score

—
out of 27
Minimal
0–4
Mild
5–9
Moderate
10–14
Mod. severe
15–19
Severe
20–27

Your score will be interpreted here.

Symptom profile

Where does your depression live?

Items 1-8 split across three interpretive sub-dimensions. Item 9 (self-harm ideation) is reported separately. The 3-dimension profile is a value-add specific to LifeByLogic; the original instrument is largely unidimensional. Use this profile as a conversation starter, not a clinical typology.

Cognitive-emotional
— / 9
Physical / somatic
— / 12
Pleasure-motivation
— / 3
Self-harm ideation (item 9)
—
Population context

Your score relative to published norms.

The general-population norm comes from Kocalevent et al. 2013 (n=5,018 German general population). The primary-care norm comes from Kroenke et al. 2001 (n=6,000 US primary care). Higher scores indicate more depression symptoms.

General population (Kocalevent 2013)M=2.91, SD=3.52, n=5,018
—
Primary care (Kroenke 2001)M=3.3, SD=3.8, n=6,000
—

One contextual note

You indicated these symptoms have been extremely difficult to live with. That impairment level — regardless of the precise band score — warrants a conversation with a clinician. Difficulty functioning is itself a clinical signal, separate from the symptom-frequency score.

At this severity level

Pathways below are educational. The single most evidence-supported next step at a severe-band score is a conversation with a clinician — therapist, family doctor, or psychiatrist. Combined treatment (therapy + medication) is often appropriate at this level. Depression this severe is treatable. Reaching out is strength, not weakness.

Your archetype · 1 of 5 research-grounded patterns

—

—

Archetypes are LBL-derived interpretive frameworks, not a published clinical typology. They surface action-relevant patterns; they do not diagnose.

Evidence-based pathways · matched to your archetype

Where to go from here.

Each pathway draws from peer-reviewed meta-analyses or randomized trials. These are educational starting points, not prescriptions. The most useful next step at moderate-to-severe scores is a conversation with a qualified clinician.

If your score is moderate or severe

The pathways above are educational. The single most evidence-supported next step at this severity level is a conversation with a clinician — therapist, family doctor, or psychiatrist. Depression at this level is treatable. Reaching out is strength, not weakness.

US: Call or text 988 (24/7) UK: Samaritans 116 123 Canada: 1-833-456-4566 Global: findahelpline.com
Save or share your summary

Your summary, in text form.

What this actually measures

The 9-item depression screener used in this tool was developed by Kroenke, Spitzer, and Williams in 2001 and published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine. It asks about the frequency of nine depression symptoms over the past two weeks, each scored 0–3, with total scores ranging from 0 to 27.

The original validation study (n=580 with structured diagnostic interview) established Cronbach's α = 0.89 — strong internal consistency — and a cutoff of ≥10 with 88% sensitivity and 88% specificity for major depressive disorder. The instrument is endorsed by NHS IAPT (Improving Access to Psychological Therapies), the VA/DoD clinical practice guidelines, and the American Psychiatric Association major depressive disorder treatment guidelines.

Each of the 9 items corresponds directly to one of the 9 DSM major depressive episode criteria — a symptom-by-symptom mapping that gives the screen unusual diagnostic transparency. The instrument is the most widely-used brief depression screener in the world, with over 100,000 citations across the clinical literature.

The framework behind the score

Major depressive disorder, per DSM-5, requires at least five of nine specific symptoms present for most of the day, nearly every day, for at least two weeks. At least one of the symptoms must be either depressed mood or anhedonia (loss of interest or pleasure). The symptoms must cause clinically significant distress or functional impairment, and must not be attributable to substances, medical conditions, or other mental disorders.

The 9-item screener captures all 9 of these criteria as separate items, with response frequency over the past 2 weeks. This direct mapping makes the instrument unusually transparent — a clinician can read each item against DSM and see exactly which symptom is being captured. The unidimensional total score works because the underlying construct (depression severity) does load on a single factor in factor analysis.

Why a 9-item instrument and not something longer? The Beck Depression Inventory has 21 items and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale is clinician-administered. Kroenke's team prioritized brevity for primary-care contexts where screening time is limited. A 9-item instrument can be completed in 2-3 minutes; longer instruments cannot, which matters in primary care where the screen is most often deployed.

The five severity bands

The standard cutpoints from Kroenke et al. 2001:

The cutoff of 10 has been validated repeatedly. Manea, Gilbody & McMillan's 2012 meta-analysis of 18 studies confirmed the ≥10 cutoff has the best balance of sensitivity (0.78–0.88) and specificity (0.85–0.94) across primary care populations.

The symptom profile — an author choice

This tool splits items 1–8 into three interpretive sub-dimensions:

Item 9 (self-harm ideation) is not grouped into any sub-dimension. It is reported separately and triggers crisis support resources independent of total score.

This sub-dimension framework is a documented author choice. The original 9-item screener is largely unidimensional in factor analysis (Kroenke 2001 confirmed single-factor structure; Cameron 2008 replicated). The 3-dimension profile is a value-add specific to this tool and is presented as an interpretive aid for matching pattern to evidence-based interventions. It is not a validated subscale and should not be reported as a clinical score.

The asymmetric item count (3 / 4 / 1) reflects the original instrument's design: physical symptoms are weighted heavily because they form the somatic core of major depressive episodes per DSM. The asymmetric scaling factors (×1.0 / ×0.75 / ×3.0) in archetype matching bring all three dimensions to comparable theoretical maximum so that any of them can dominate when genuinely the leading edge.

The five archetypes

Five archetypes match symptom profile to evidence-based intervention pathways. Order matters — first match wins, more specific archetypes tested first:

Archetypes are LBL-derived interpretive frameworks. They are not a published clinical typology. They exist to surface action-relevant patterns and match them to the most evidence-supported intervention class for that pattern. They do not diagnose.

What this does not tell you

  1. Snapshot, not trajectory. The screener measures last-2-weeks symptoms. Depression naturally fluctuates with life events. A high score during a difficult period doesn't necessarily mean MDE; a low score during a calm period doesn't mean you've never had a depression problem.
  2. Self-report dependent. Honest self-report is the foundation. Strong self-criticism, alexithymia, denial, or recall bias can all distort scores in either direction.
  3. Not diagnostic. MDE diagnosis requires DSM-5 or ICD-11 clinical interview. The screen is sensitive (88% per Kroenke 2001) but not diagnostic.
  4. Cultural variation. The instrument was developed in US/European primary care. Validation in non-Western populations exists but cultural expression of depression varies, and somatic-vs-cognitive emphasis differs across cultures.
  5. Differential diagnosis ignored. A high score may reflect bipolar depression rather than unipolar, persistent depressive disorder rather than MDE, adjustment disorder, or grief. The screen flags "depression symptoms present" not "the source or kind of depression."
  6. Sub-dimension scoring is interpretive, not validated. The 3-dimension profile (cognitive-emotional / physical / pleasure-motivation) is an author-derived interpretive aid. The original instrument is largely unidimensional. Use the profile as a conversation starter, not a clinical typology.
  7. Archetypes are interpretive frameworks. The 5 archetypes are LBL author-derived to surface action-relevant patterns. They are not a published clinical typology.
  8. Functional impairment item is captured but not summed. The 10th question informs interpretation but does not change the 0-27 score.
  9. Documented author choices. Three components are not directly derivable from published literature: the sub-dimension item assignments (3/4/1 split), the asymmetric scaling factors (1.0/0.75/3.0) in archetype thresholds, and the approximate confirmed-MDE rates per band. These are explicitly named as author choices on the methodology page.

How to cite this tool

If you reference this tool in academic, clinical, or professional work, use one of the standard citation formats below.

LifeByLogic. (2026). LBL Depression Test — A Validated 9-Item Screen with Symptom Profile (Version 1.0) [Web application]. https://lifebylogic.com/life-dashboard/depression-test/

Sources & citations

Every claim on this page traces to peer-reviewed research or primary diagnostic data. Full references with DOIs:

  1. Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. W. (2001). The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16(9), 606–613. doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x
  2. Manea, L., Gilbody, S., & McMillan, D. (2012). Optimal cut-off score for diagnosing depression with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9): a meta-analysis. CMAJ, 184(3), E191–E196. doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.110829
  3. Kocalevent, R. D., Hinz, A., & Brähler, E. (2013). Standardization of the depression screener Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) in the general population. General Hospital Psychiatry, 35(5), 551–555. doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2013.04.006
  4. Beard, C., Hsu, K. J., Rifkin, L. S., Busch, A. B., & Björgvinsson, T. (2016). Validation of the PHQ-9 in a psychiatric sample. Journal of Affective Disorders, 193, 267–273. doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2015.12.075
  5. Hasin, D. S., Sarvet, A. L., Meyers, J. L., et al. (2018). Epidemiology of adult DSM-5 major depressive disorder and its specifiers in the United States. JAMA Psychiatry, 75(4), 336–346. doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.4602
  6. Cuijpers, P., Berking, M., Andersson, G., Quigley, L., Kleiboer, A., & Dobson, K. S. (2013). A meta-analysis of cognitive-behavioural therapy for adult depression, alone and in comparison with other treatments. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 58(7), 376–385. doi.org/10.1177/070674371305800702
  7. Cooney, G. M., Dwan, K., Greig, C. A., et al. (2013). Exercise for depression. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (9), CD004366. doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004366.pub6
  8. Dimidjian, S., Hollon, S. D., Dobson, K. S., et al. (2006). Randomized trial of behavioral activation, cognitive therapy, and antidepressant medication in the acute treatment of adults with major depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74(4), 658–670. doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.74.4.658
  9. Ekers, D., Webster, L., Van Straten, A., Cuijpers, P., Richards, D., & Gilbody, S. (2014). Behavioural activation for depression: an update of meta-analysis of effectiveness and sub group analysis. PLOS ONE, 9(6), e100100. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100100
  10. Hollon, S. D., DeRubeis, R. J., Shelton, R. C., et al. (2005). Prevention of relapse following cognitive therapy vs medications in moderate to severe depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(4), 417–422. doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.62.4.417
  11. Kuyken, W., Warren, F. C., Taylor, R. S., et al. (2016). Efficacy of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy in prevention of depressive relapse: an individual patient data meta-analysis from randomized trials. JAMA Psychiatry, 73(6), 565–574. doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.0076
  12. Cuijpers, P., van Straten, A., & Andersson, G. (2008). Internet-administered cognitive behavior therapy for health problems: a systematic review. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 31(2), 169–177. doi.org/10.1007/s10865-007-9144-1
  13. Mann, J. J., Apter, A., Bertolote, J., et al. (2005). Suicide prevention strategies: a systematic review. JAMA, 294(16), 2064–2074. doi.org/10.1001/jama.294.16.2064
  14. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). DSM-5. APA Publishing.
  15. Lejuez, C. W., Hopko, D. R., & Hopko, S. D. (2001). A brief behavioral activation treatment for depression: Treatment manual. Behavior Modification, 25(2), 255–286. doi.org/10.1177/0145445501252005

Read the full methodology for documented author choices, scoring pseudocode, validation evidence, and limitations.