Elderly women are at greater risk of comorbid generalised anxiety and depression than elderly men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Schoevers RA, Beekman AT, Deeg DJ, et al . Comorbidity and risk-patterns of depression, generalised anxiety disorder and mixed anxiety-depression in later life: results from the AMSTEL study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2003;18:994–1001.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Q How prevalent are depression, generalised anxiety, and mixed anxiety/depression in elderly people and how similar are their risk factors? ### ![Graphic][5] Design: Cross sectional study. ### ![Graphic][6] Setting: Amsterdam, The Netherlands; time period not specified. ### ![Graphic][7] People: 3790 people aged 65–86 years old, living in the community. Participants were randomly sampled from 30 general practices. Adults with organic disorders were excluded. ### ![Graphic][8] Risk factors: Participants were interviewed to obtain information on: age, education level, socioeconomic status, marital status, social support, professional support, history of treatment for depression or generalised anxiety, or both, and presence of chronic disease … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DInternational%2Bjournal%2Bof%2Bgeriatric%2Bpsychiatry%26rft.stitle%253DInt%2BJ%2BGeriatr%2BPsychiatry%26rft.aulast%253DSchoevers%26rft.auinit1%253DR.%2BA.%26rft.volume%253D18%26rft.issue%253D11%26rft.spage%253D994%26rft.epage%253D1001%26rft.atitle%253DComorbidity%2Band%2Brisk-patterns%2Bof%2Bdepression%252C%2Bgeneralised%2Banxiety%2Bdisorder%2Band%2Bmixed%2Banxiety-depression%2Bin%2Blater%2Blife%253A%2Bresults%2Bfrom%2Bthe%2BAMSTEL%2Bstudy.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1002%252Fgps.1001%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F14618550%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/gps.1001&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=14618550&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmental%2F7%2F2%2F56.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000186794300005&link_type=ISI [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [8]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".