MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2102875335

Generalized anxiety disorder and health care use.

2005· article· en· W2102875335 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lynda Bélanger, Robert Ladouceur, Charles M. Morin

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorryGeneralized anxiety disorderAnxietyMedicineInsomniaHealth carePsychiatryDepression (economics)Family medicinePatient Health QuestionnaireClinical psychologyDepressive symptoms
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine self-reported health care use and health care-seeking behaviour of patients meeting DSM-IV's diagnostic criteria for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). DESIGN: Survey of outpatients recruited at three different times of the day using questionnaires on worry and anxiety (a six-item screening questionnaire based on DSM-IV criteria for GAD), on perceived health problems, and on health care use and health care-seeking behaviour. The assessment package also included well validated assessment instruments for insomnia and depression symptoms. All patients seeking health care were invited to participate. Participants completed the survey as they waited in the reception area. SETTING: Four randomly selected community-based medical clinics of Quebec city's metropolitan area. PARTICIPANTS: A final sample of 1110 patients among 1878 outpatients invited to participate included 219 (19.7%) who tested positive for GAD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported worry and anxiety (based on DSM-IV criteria for GAD), self-perceived health problems, health care use and health care-seeking behaviour, insomnia, and symptoms of depression. RESULTS: Participants who tested positive on a screening test for GAD reported more annual medical visits (5.3 versus 3.4) than other patients. Those who reported at least five annual medical visits were nearly four times more likely to have positive results for GAD. Women were 1.6 times more likely to have positive results than men were. Patients who tested positive reported insomnia-type sleep disturbances, depressive symptoms, fatigue, and gastric problems significantly more often than others. Forty-two percent had consulted a family physician in the past year with a complaint of anxiety. Eighty percent of patients who tested positive reported they believed they had an anxiety problem, and this belief predicted positive test results (odds ratio = 20.3). Yet most reported not having sought other types of medical or psychological care specifically for anxiety in the past year. CONCLUSION: Some patients in this sample with symptoms of GAD mainly seek primary care for their symptoms. Questions about excessive worrying and anxiety, as part of routine examination, can increase recognition of GAD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes→French-language works237,207→