Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 446

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence, correlates, co-morbidity, and comparative disability of DSM-IV generalized anxiety disorder in the USA: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions

GRANT, BRIDGET F., HASIN, DEBORAH S., STINSON, FREDERICK S., DAWSON, DEBORAH A., JUNE RUAN, W., GOLDSTEIN, RISË B., SMITH, SHARON M., SAHA, TULSHI D., HUANG, BOJI·2005·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background. This study addressed the prevalences, correlates, co-morbidity and disability of DSM-IV generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and other psychiatric disorders in a large national survey of the general population, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism's (NIAAA) National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC). The study presents nationally representative data, for the first time, on prevalence, correlates, co-morbidity, and comparative disability of DSM-IV GAD. Method. Data are taken from a large (n=43093) representative sample of the adult USA population. Results. Prevalences of 12-month and lifetime GAD were 2·1% and 4·1%. Being female, middle-aged, widowed/separated/divorced, and low income increased risk, while being Asian, Hispanic, or Black decreased risk. GAD was highly co-morbid with substance use, and other anxiety, mood, and personality disorders. Co-morbidity in GAD was not substantially greater than for most other Axis I and II disorders. Disability and impairment in pure GAD were equivalent to pure mood disorders, but significantly greater than in pure substance use, and other anxiety and personality disorders. Individuals co-morbid for GAD and each mood disorder were more disabled than those with pure forms of GAD or each mood disorder. When co-morbid with GAD, nicotine dependence and other anxiety and personality disorders were not associated with increased disability over that associated with pure GAD, but GAD did show increased disability over that due to each of these disorders in pure form. Conclusions. Associations between GAD and Axis I and II disorders were strong and significant, with variation among specific disorders. Results strongly support GAD as an independent disorder with significant impairment and disability.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291705006069

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Cited by

See all 446

Metadata

Authors
GRANT, B. F., HASIN, D. S., STINSON, F. S., DAWSON, D. A., JUNE RUAN, W., GOLDSTEIN, R. B., SMITH, S. M., SAHA, T. D., & HUANG, B.
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2005-10-05
Volume
35
Issue
12
Pages
1747-1759
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2061469083
Cited by
446
References
16
FWCI
23.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prevalence, correlates, co-morbidity, and comparative disability of DSM-IV generalized anxiety disorder in the USA: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0033291705006069
The paper
GRANT, B. F., HASIN, D. S., STINSON, F. S., DAWSON, D. A., JUNE RUAN, W., GOLDSTEIN, R. B., SMITH, S. M., SAHA, T. D., & HUANG, B. (2005). Prevalence, correlates, co-morbidity, and comparative disability of DSM-IV generalized anxiety disorder in the USA: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Psychological Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291705006069

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.