The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 68 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sensitivity to change and minimal clinically important difference of the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire (GAD-7)
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“The minimal clinically important difference for GAD-7 was 3.8; the clinically relevant change was ≥4 points [51].”
From Clinical Efficacy and Psychological Mechanisms of an App-Based Digital Therapeutic for Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Randomized Controlled Trial (2021) · cites this paper as [51]
In the citing paper
“This change met the level of minimal clinical important difference (MCID), which is estimated at 4 points on the GAD-7 total score [30].”
From The Psychosocial Impact of COVID-19 on Older Adults with Cancer: A Rapid Review (2022) · cites this paper as [30]
In the citing paper
“which is estimated at 4 points on the GAD-7 total score [30].”
From The Psychosocial Impact of COVID-19 on Older Adults with Cancer: A Rapid Review (2022) · cites this paper as [30]
In the citing paper
“Anxiety will be measured with the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7; range, 0–21; higher scores indicate greater severity) [25].”
In the citing paper
“As noted above, we observed clinically meaningful improvements in both anxiety and depression, with reductions in GAD-7 (− 5.04) and PHQ-9 (− 5.64) higher than the MCID for both conditions (3.8 and 5, respectively) [66, 67].”
From Telerehabilitation of acute musculoskeletal multi-disorders: prospective, single-arm, interventional study (2022) · cites this paper as [66]
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
A Brief Measure for Assessing Generalized Anxiety Disorder: The GAD-7
Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B. W., & Löwe, B. (2006) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092 · Cited by 31,765
Self-citationKessler, R. C., Berglund, P., Demler, O., Jin, R., Merikangas, K. R., & Walters, E. E. (2005) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.593 · Cited by 20,391
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM)
Leong, F. T. L. (2008) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781412963978.n182 · Cited by 10,861
Lakens, D. (2013) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863 · Cited by 10,303
Spitzer, R. L. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.18.1737 · Cited by 9,802
Development of a Rating Scale for Primary Depressive Illness
Hamilton, M. (1967) · British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8260.1967.tb00530.x · Cited by 8,410
Kessler, R. C., Berglund, P., Demler, O., Jin, R., Koretz, D., Merikangas, K. R., Rush, A. J., Walters, E. E., & Wang, P. S. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.23.3095 · Cited by 7,988
Anxiety disorders in primary care: prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., Monahan, P. O., & Löwe, B. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-146-5-200703060-00004 · Cited by 4,741
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- First, 2002, Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I disorders, research version, patient edition (SCID-I/P)
- Schuck, 2000, Z. Med. Psychol, 9, 125
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China
Cao, W., Fang, Z., Hou, G., Han, M., Xu, X., Dong, J., & Zheng, J. (2020) · Psychiatry Research · doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112934 · Cited by 5,843
Sun, J., Liang, K., Chi, X., & Chen, S. (2021) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare9121709 · Cited by 310
“The GAD-7 has gradually become a widely used measurement tool in populations with different characteristics, especially adult populations, and showed satisfactory reliability and validity [17,18].”
BackgroundMethodAlzueta, E., Perrin, P. B., Baker, F. C., Caffarra, S., Ramos‐Usuga, D., Yüksel, D., & Arango‐Lasprilla, J. C. (2020) · Journal of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1002/jclp.23082 · Cited by 282
Validation of the Fear of COVID-19 Scale in a US College Sample
Perz, C. A., Lang, B., & Harrington, R. (2020) · International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction · doi:10.1007/s11469-020-00356-3 · Cited by 251
Psilocybin for treatment resistant depression in patients taking a concomitant SSRI medication
Goodwin, G. M., Croal, M., Feifel, D., Kelly, J. R., Marwood, L., Mistry, S., O’Keane, V., Peck, S. K., Simmons, H., Sisa, C., et al. (2023) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/s41386-023-01648-7 · Cited by 187
“90) by Week 3, which is considered a clinically meaningful improvement in anxiety symptoms [41].”
Background
Metadata
- 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
- ORCID
- 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
- Licence
- 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
