Key result
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Rating Scale (HADS) demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy for generalized anxiety disorder (AUC 0.88) and major depressive episodes (AUC 0.93) in general practice.
Why the study?
Does the HADS questionnaire improve the diagnostic accuracy for generalized anxiety disorder and major depressive episodes compared to general practitioners' clinical judgment?
Cross-Sectional (n=1,781)
Single-blind (GPs blind to patients' HADS scores)
Yes
Does the HADS questionnaire improve the diagnostic accuracy for generalized anxiety disorder and major depressive episodes compared to general practitioners' clinical judgment?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.88% vs 0.77%
The HADS questionnaire demonstrates strong psychometric properties and case-finding abilities for generalized anxiety disorder and major depressive episodes in general practice, outperforming standard GP clinical judgment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports HADS for case-finding in primary care; leaves open whether routine adoption improves outcomes over clinical judgment.
Olssøn et al. (2005) conducted a cross-sectional in Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and major depressive episodes (MDE) (n=1,781). Hospital Anxiety and Depression Rating Scale (HADS) vs. General practitioners' Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) rating was evaluated on Area under the curve (AUC) for detecting GAD and MDE. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Rating Scale (HADS) demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy for generalized anxiety disorder (AUC 0.88) and major depressive episodes (AUC 0.93) in general practice.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: