Cited by 641Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingMental Health Research Topics

Sensitivity to change and minimal clinically important difference of the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire (GAD-7)

Toussaint, Anne, Hüsing, Paul, Gumz, Antje, Wingenfeld, Katja, Härter, Martin, Schramm, Elisabeth, Löwe, Bernd·2020·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background Effective treatment requires regular follow-up and monitoring of symptoms. We investigated sensitivity to change and minimal clinically important difference of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7).Methods This study included all participants from a multisite trial of chronic depression. Baseline and follow-up (12 and 48 weeks) data were used to assess treatment response. Effect sizes (ES) and standardized response means (SRM) of pre- and post-GAD-7 mean changes were calculated for subgroups of patients, who did or did not improve according to ratings in the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-24).Results N = 261 patients were included in the analyses. In the subgroup of patients who improved according to HRSD-24, GAD-7 scores were significantly lower after 12 weeks (t = -6.31, df = 120, p < .001; ES = -0.51, SRM = -0.57), and 48 weeks of treatment (t = -12.68, df = 141, p < .001; ES = -1.0, SRM = -1.7), when compared to admission. In the group who worsened, GAD-7 scores were significantly higher after 12 weeks (t = 2.96, df = 41, p = .005; ES = 0.30, SRM = 0.46), and increased after 48 weeks (t = 1.99, df = 21, p = .059; ES = 0.37, SRM = 0.43), when compared to baseline. The unchanged group showed no significant difference between baseline and follow-up. MCID was estimated 4 points on the GAD-7 total score.Limitations Confirmation of these findings and further investigation of the GAD-7 in populations and trials focusing on anxiety-specific treatment is highly recommended.Conclusions Results show that the GAD-7 is sensitive to detect change in psychopathology over the course of treatment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2020.01.032

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Toussaint, A., Hüsing, P., Gumz, A., Wingenfeld, K., Härter, M., Schramm, E., & Löwe, B.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
  • University of Freiburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Toussaint, Anne
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-03
Volume
265
Pages
395-401
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3000661394
Cited by
641
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 134 · 2025: 138 · 2024: 113 · 2023: 99 · 2022: 68 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 30
FWCI
61.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
GAD-7, Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale, anxiety symptoms, chronic depression, sensitivity to change, minimal clinically important difference, standardized response mean, treatment response monitoring, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale
MeSH terms
Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Patient Health Questionnaire, Anxiety Disorders, Depression, Humans, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review