CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 303Cancer survivorship and careAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Hospital anxiety and depression scale cutoff scores for cancer patients in acute care

Open access
Singer, S, Kuhnt, S, Götze, H, Hauss, J, Hinz, A, Liebmann, A, Krauß, O, Lehmann, A, Schwarz, R·2009·British Journal of Cancer
DOI 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604952PMC PMC2661775
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine optimal cutoff scores for the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) when used in evaluating cancer patients in acute care. A total of 689 cancer patients were assessed during their first days of in-patient treatment, using the structured clinical interview for DSM and the HADS. Statistical analysis was performed using ROC curves. A total of 222 patients (32%) had a mental disorder. The area under the curve was the best in the total scale of the HADS, namely 0.73. With a score of > or =13, it is possible to detect 76% of the cases with a specificity of .60, whereas 95% of the cases can be detected with a score of > or =6 (specificity 0.21). With scores of > or =16 and > or =22, recommended by the test authors for primary care, only 59 and 30% of the comorbid cancer patients are indicated. Lower HADS cutoff scores when preferable when evaluating cancer patients than are recommended for use in primary care. When using HADS in clinical practice and epidemiological studies, it is important to decide whether, for the task at hand, high detection rates of affected patients or low misclassification rates are more important.

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 · 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604952

Cites

24 of 24 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

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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 25 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. First M, Spitzer R, Gibbon M, Williams J (1997) Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I), Clinician Version. American Psychiatric Press: Washington, DC

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 303

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Singer, S., Kuhnt, S., Götze, H., Hauss, J., Hinz, A., Liebmann, A., Krauß, O., Lehmann, A., & Schwarz, R.
Affiliations
  • University of London (GB)
  • Leipzig University (DE)
  • Helios Park-Klinikum Leipzig (DE)
Corresponding author
Singer, S
ORCID
Venue
British Journal of Cancer
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2009-02-24
Volume
100
Issue
6
Pages
908-912
ISSN
  • 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-1827
DOI
10.1038/sj.bjc.6604952
PMC
PMC2661775
OpenAlex
W2017154400
Cited by
303
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • British Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, cut-off values, cancer patients, acute care, anxiety, depression, mental illness, diagnostic accuracy, receiver operating characteristic
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anxiety, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Female, Humans, Inpatients, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales

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