Feasibility of using Arabic Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) to assess anxiety and depression among patients attending Accident and Emergency at a University Hospital setting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of using Arabic Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) to assess depression and anxiety among patients attending accident and emergency (A & E) at a University Hospital setting in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. METHODS: In this prospective observational study translated questionnaire of HADS was used for patients aged 18 years or above who presented to A & E at King Khalid University Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The study included 257 patients as per an agreed inclusion criteria. The study quantified depression and anxiety and its association with demographic and or illness related variables using SPSS. RESULTS: Out of 257 participants, the dominant age group, ranged between 18-30 years (40.9%) with female participants (55.3%) outweigh the male among all. The overall occurrence of depression was 27.2% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 21.8 % to 32.6%) and anxiety was 23% (17.8% to 28.2%CI). Marital, educational and economic status of participants, were statistically significantly associated (p<0.05) with the levels of anxiety whereas age, marital, education, economic and employment status were associated (p<0.05) with the levels of depression. CONCLUSION: In the A & E setting at University Hospital in Saudi Arabia, comorbid depression and anxiety is not uncommon as enumerated by using HADS. The identified cases could then be sent for appropriate psychiatric treatment promptly not only to improve quality of individual care but also to reduce the overall health care costs in local context.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".