MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392343432 · doi:10.33448/rsd-v13i2.45107

Systematic Review of the use of Depression Anxiety Stress scale 21(Dass-21) in the elderly: Practical applicability across countries

2024· article· en· W4392343432 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Society and Development · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDASSAnxietyDepression (economics)PsychologyScale (ratio)Stress (linguistics)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryGeographyEconomicsCartographyPhilosophyMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim was to identify the practical applicability of the Depression, Anxiety and Stress scale (DASS-21) in elderly across countries. Online database searches (EMBASE, PubMed, SciELO) were performed to identify sample characteristics, the purpose of using this scale, and the location of participant recruitment. The search terms included “Aged” OR “Elderly” with the term "dass 21” OR “depression, anxiety, stress scale-21”. The initial data search yielded 855 studies, 833 were excluded. Finally, 22 full-text were analyzed for the study purposes, developed in 13 different countries, including 14,339 participants. The samples were composed predominantly of women, with ages ranging between 60 and 91 years. DASS-21 was used in clinical and non-clinical elderly. The findings have demonstrated that the DASS-21 is useful in monitoring depression, anxiety, and stress in this population across.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.365 · 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