Cited by 147Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and AccessPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Is the Beck Anxiety Inventory a good tool to assess the severity of anxiety? A primary care study in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA)

Open access
Muntingh, Anna DT, van der Feltz-Cornelis, Christina M, van Marwijk, Harm WJ, Spinhoven, Philip, Penninx, Brenda WJH, van Balkom, Anton JLM·2011·BMC Family Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Appropriate management of anxiety disorders in primary care requires clinical assessment and monitoring of the severity of the anxiety. This study focuses on the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) as a severity indicator for anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders (social phobia, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, agoraphobia or generalized anxiety disorder), depressive disorders or no disorder (controls). METHODS: Participants were 1601 primary care patients participating in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Regression analyses were used to compare the mean BAI scores of the different diagnostic groups and to correct for age and gender. RESULTS: Patients with any anxiety disorder had a significantly higher mean score than the controls. A significantly higher score was found for patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia compared to patients with agoraphobia only or social phobia only. BAI scores in patients with an anxiety disorder with a co-morbid anxiety disorder and in patients with an anxiety disorder with a co-morbid depressive disorder were significantly higher than BAI scores in patients with an anxiety disorder alone or patients with a depressive disorder alone. Depressed and anxious patients did not differ significantly in their mean scores. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the BAI may be used as a severity indicator of anxiety in primary care patients with different anxiety disorders. However, because the instrument seems to reflect the severity of depression as well, it is not a suitable instrument to discriminate between anxiety and depression in a primary care population.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2296-12-66

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • BAI has high reliability and good validity.

    “The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) is a scale that measures anxiety using a list of 21 anxiety symptoms and has high reliability and good validity (Beck et al., 1988; Muntingh et al., 2011).”

    From Internet-based treatment for vulvodynia (EMBLA) – Study protocol for a randomised controlled study (2021) · cites this paper as Muntingh et al., 2011

    The Methods (Assessment; page not specified) describe the 21-symptom BAI and report high internal consistency (α = .92) and one-week test–retest reliability of .75. The Conclusions (page not specified) support its use as an anxiety-severity indicator in primary care, but the paper also finds that it reflects depression severity and cannot reliably discriminate between anxiety and depression there. The unqualified claim of good validity omits that limitation. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. McIntosh A Cohen A Turnbull N Esmonde L Dennis P Eatock J Feetam C Hague J Hughes I Kelly J Kosky N Lear G Owens L Ratcliffe J Salkovskis P Clinical guidelines and evidence review for panic disorder and generalised anxiety disorder 2010 Sheffield, University of Sheffield/London: National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care
  2. American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV) 2001 Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Publishing 1 3
  3. Wacker HR Battegay R Mullejans R Schlosser C Stefanis CN, Rabavilas AD, Soldatos CR Using the CIDI-C in the general population Psychiatry: A world perspective 2006 Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers 138 143

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Muntingh, A. D., van der Feltz-Cornelis, C. M., van Marwijk, H. W., Spinhoven, P., Penninx, B. W., & van Balkom, A. J.
Affiliations
  • Trimbos Institute (NL)
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
Corresponding author
  • Muntingh, Anna DT
  • Spinhoven, Philip
  • Penninx, Brenda WJH
Venue
BMC Family Practice
Published
2011-07-04
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
66-66
ISSN
1471-2296 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2097904666
Cited by
147
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7
FWCI
5.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Family Practice (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Universiteit Leiden (10‐000‐1002)
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
  • GGZ inGeest
  • Rivierduinen
  • GGZ Friesland
  • GGZ Drenthe
  • Nederlands Instituut voor Onderzoek van de Gezondheidszorg (10-000-1002)
  • Trimbos-instituut
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
Beck Anxiety Inventory, anxiety levels, anxiety disorders, primary care, panic disorder with agoraphobia, agoraphobia, social anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, comorbid depression, NESDA
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Anxiety, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Primary Health Care, Psychological Tests, Severity of Illness Index, Young Adult

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