MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400224684 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afae122

Detection of anxiety symptoms and disorders in older adults: a diagnostic accuracy systematic review

2024· article· en· W4400224684 on OpenAlexaff
Kayla Atchison, Pauline Wu, Leyla Samii, Michael Walsh, Zahinoor Ismail, Andrea Iaboni, Zahra Goodarzi

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyMedicineBeck Anxiety InventoryConfidence intervalGeneralized anxiety disorderPsycINFOAnxiety sensitivityPsychiatryMEDLINEDepression (economics)Internal medicineBeck Depression Inventory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Anxiety symptoms and disorders are common in older adults and often go undetected. A systematic review was completed to identify tools that can be used to detect anxiety symptoms and disorders in community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO were searched using the search concepts anxiety, older adults and diagnostic accuracy in March 2023. Included articles assessed anxiety in community-dwelling older adults using an index anxiety tool and a gold standard form of anxiety assessment and reported resulting diagnostic accuracy outcomes. Estimates of pooled diagnostic accuracy outcomes were completed. RESULTS: Twenty-three anxiety tools were identified from the 32 included articles. Pooled diagnostic accuracy outcomes were estimated for the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI)-20 [n = 3, sensitivity = 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.70-0.97, specificity = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.67-0.89] to detect generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and for the GAI-20 (n = 3, cut off ≥ 9, sensitivity = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.62-0.83, specificity = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.74-1.00), Beck Anxiety Inventory (n = 3, sensitivity = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.58-0.79, specificity = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.51-0.68) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A) (n = 3, sensitivity = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.60-0.89, specificity = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.60-0.87) to detect anxiety disorders in clinical samples. CONCLUSION: The GAI-20 was the most studied tool and had adequate sensitivity while maintaining acceptable specificity when identifying GAD and anxiety disorders. The GAI-20, GAI-Short Form and HADS-A tools are supported for use in detecting anxiety in community-dwelling older adults. Brief, self-rated and easy-to-use tools may be the best options for anxiety detection in community-dwelling older adults given resource limitations. Clinicians may consider factors including patient comorbidities and anxiety prevalence when selecting a tool and cut off.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.103
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.103
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.011
Bibliometrics0.0120.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207