MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213909006 · doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsab119

Measurement Invariance of the GAD-7 and CESD-R-10 Among Adolescents in Canada

2021· article· en· W3213909006 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Isabella Romano, Mark A. Ferro, Karen A. Patte, Scott T. Leatherdale

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Psychology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInstitute of Population and Public HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth Canada
KeywordsMeasurement invarianceGeneralized anxiety disorderDepression (economics)PsychologyAnxietyCenter for Epidemiologic Studies Depression ScaleClinical psychologyConfoundingConfirmatory factor analysisMedicinePsychiatryInternal medicineStatisticsStructural equation modelingMathematicsDepressive symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of our study was to assess measurement invariance (by grade and sex) of the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) and 10-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Revised (CESD-R-10) scales in a sample of adolescents in Canada. If measurement invariance was demonstrated, our secondary objective was to estimate differences in scale scores across these subgroups. METHODS: We used data from 59,052 adolescents in Year 7 (2018-19) of the COMPASS school-based study. Measurement invariance was tested within a multigroup confirmatory factor analysis framework. Differences in scale scores were estimated using mixed linear regression which accounted for school-level clustering and adjusted for relevant confounders. RESULTS: Both the GAD-7 and CESD-R-10 demonstrated strict measurement invariance by sex and grade in our sample. Mean scale scores were higher among adolescents in grade 12 compared to grade 9 (βGAD-7 = 0.91, p < .001; βCESD-R-10 = 0.99, p < .001) and among female adolescents compared to males (βGAD-7 = 3.36, p < .001; βCESD-R-10 = 2.58, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the validity of the GAD-7 and CESD-R-10 for screening risk of generalized anxiety and depression among Canadian adolescents, and further indicate that differences observed in scale scores across subgroups reflect actual differences in risk for generalized anxiety and major depression, respectively.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations68
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric PsychologySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207