Despite the influence of Beck's cognitive models of depression, the presence and magnitude of the specific proposed cognitive biases have not been systematically investigated. After a systematic search in PsycInfo and PubMED, studies reporting self-reported outcomes on cognitive biases and depressive symptoms in depressed and/or healthy groups were included. From a total of 4840 records, two different meta-analyses were conducted. 23 studies on 4865 participants provided data about catastrophising and depression (g = 0.95, 95% CI [0.64; 1.26]) and 40 studies on 4678 participants provided data about interpretation bias in depression (g = 0.78, 95% CI [0.43; 1.13]). Moderation analyses showed that the relationship between catastrophising and depression was higher in studies with more women, when the corresponding author was from a Western country, and when the instrument to measure depression was the DSM criteria, the SCL-90, the BDI, or the DASS. The relationship between interpretation bias and depressive symptoms was significant only in studies comparing depressed and healthy groups, and when using specific instruments to measure symptoms (DSM/RDC criteria plus a scale cut-off score) and cognitive bias (CDQ/CBQ, SCT, AST-D, other). Some limitations are acknowledged, but risk of publication bias was found to be low, and these results support the utility of some self-reported measures of cognitive biases in depression.

尽管贝克的抑郁症认知模型有影响，但尚未系统地研究具体提出的认知偏差的存在和程度。在 PsycInfo 和 PubMED 中进行系统搜索后，研究报告了抑郁和/或健康组的认知偏差和抑郁症状的自我报告结果。从总共 4840 条记录中，进行了两种不同的荟萃分析。对 4865 名参与者进行的 23 项研究提供了关于灾难性和抑郁症的数据 ( g  = 0.95, 95% CI [0.64; 1.26])，对 4678 名参与者进行的 40 项研究提供了有关抑郁症解释偏差的数据 ( g = 0.78, 95% CI [0.43; 1.13]）。适度分析表明，在女性较多的研究中，当通讯作者来自西方国家，并且测量抑郁症的工具是 DSM 标准、SCL-90、BDI 或达斯。解释偏差和抑郁症状之间的关系仅在比较抑郁和健康组的研究中，以及使用特定工具测量症状（DSM/RDC 标准加上量表截止分数）和认知偏差（CDQ/CBQ、SCT、 AST-D，其他）。承认一些局限性，但发现发表偏倚的风险很低，这些结果支持一些自我报告的抑郁症认知偏倚测量的效用。