Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 294

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Longitudinal Study of Depression and Health Services Use Among Elderly Primary Care Patients

Callahan, Christopher M., Hui, Siu L., Nienaber, Nancy A., Musick, Beverly S., Tierney, William M.·1994·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

OBJECTIVE : To describe the prevalence and 9‐month incidence of depressive symptoms among a cohort of elderly primary care patients and to determine whether different patterns of depression are associated with different patterns of health services use. DESIGN : Prospective study of depressive symptoms as measured by the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES‐D) scale and identification of patients' outpatient health services use through an electronic medical record system. SETTING : An academic primary care group practice at an urban ambulatory care clinic. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS : 1711 patients aged 60 and older who completed the CES‐D at baseline and 9 months later; 935 of these patients also completed the CES‐D at 6 months. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS : The prevalence of significant symptoms of depression (CES‐D ≥ 16) was 17.1% at baseline and 18.8% at 9 months; 26.8% of patients exceeded the threshold on the CES‐D either at baseline or 9 months, and the 9‐month incidence was 11.7%. Among the patients re‐interviewed at both 6 and 9 months, the 6‐month incidence was 12%, and the incidence between the 6‐ and 9‐month assessments was 10%. Of the 292 patients with depression at baseline, 140 (47.6%) remained depressed at the 9‐month follow‐up. Baseline and 6‐month CES‐D score, in addition to perceived health at 6 months, explained 45% of the variance in the 9‐month CES‐D score. Patients above the threshold on the CES‐D at any time were more likely to rate their health as fair or poor (69.8% vs 43.7%) and more likely to have an emergency room visit (40.4% vs 29.4%). These patients also had 38% more outpatient visits (7.7 vs 5.6) and 61% higher total outpatient charges ($1209 vs $751) than patients who never exceeded the CES‐D threshold over the 9‐month window (all P values < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS : Depressive symptoms were frequent and often persistent in this patient population. We identified patterns of oscillating severity of symptoms within individuals but relatively stable incidence and prevalence rates over a 9‐month period. Patients who exceeded the threshold on the CES‐D at any time during the study had significantly greater health services use and poorer perceived health.

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 · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1994.tb06554.x

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 294

Metadata

Authors
Callahan, C. M., Hui, S. L., Nienaber, N. A., Musick, B. S., & Tierney, W. M.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1994-08
Volume
42
Issue
8
Pages
833-838
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W1971030154
Cited by
294
References
4
FWCI
12.86
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: Longitudinal Study of Depression and Health Services Use Among Elderly Primary Care Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1994.tb06554.x
The paper
Callahan, C. M., Hui, S. L., Nienaber, N. A., Musick, B. S., & Tierney, W. M. (1994). Longitudinal Study of Depression and Health Services Use Among Elderly Primary Care Patients. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1994.tb06554.x

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.