MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416888253 · doi:10.1016/j.jatmed.2025.10.001

Anxiety and depression in non-cardiac surgical patients and associations with adverse outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4416888253 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Chung, Joshua Andrusiak, Sam Ali, Ellene Yan, Aparna Saripella, Frances Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Anesthesia and Translational Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Western HospitalUniversity of OttawaUniversity Health NetworkCanada Research Chairs
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity Health Network FoundationOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareResMedResMed Foundation
KeywordsDepression (economics)AnxietyAdverse effectMEDLINEDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mental health disorders such as anxiety and depression are associated with advanced disease at presentation, reduced treatment uptake, and worse postoperative outcomes. Despite this, preoperative screening remains underutilized. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to characterize the prevalence of preoperative anxiety and depression in non-cardiac surgery patients and assess their associations with adverse postoperative outcomes. Methods: The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024578357) and followed PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CENTRAL were searched. All studies included were prospective cohorts that enrolled a minimum of 100 adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery, used validated preoperative mental health screening tools, and reported postoperative outcomes. Studies involving cardiac, neurosurgical, or bariatric procedures were excluded. Random-effects meta-analysis generated pooled prevalence, mean difference (MD), and odds ratios (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) and 95 % prediction intervals (PI). Results: Forty-six studies (n = 23,628; mean age 58.5 ± 19.2 years; 61 % female) met inclusion criteria. Pooled prevalence of anxiety was 26 % (95 % CI, 21 %-31 %; 95 % PI, 20 %-33 %; I² = 95 %) while depression was 23 % (95 % CI, 14 %-31 %; 95 % PI, 14 %-36 %; I² = 100 %). The prevalence of anxiety ranged from 19 % in orthopedic to 29 % in cancer surgery. It was associated with a greater hospital length of stay (MD 0.55 days; 95 % CI, 0.29-0.82; 95 % PI, -0.04-1.14; I² = 0 %). The prevalence of depression ranged from 17 % in orthopedic to 30 % in cancer surgery and 24 % in mixed surgery. Preoperative depression was associated with increased odds of postoperative delirium (OR 2.33; 95 % CI, 1.74-3.11; 95 % PI, 1.5-3.5; I² = 0 %). Conclusions: Anxiety and depression affect one-fifth of non-cardiac surgical patients, with highest prevalence in cancer surgery. Preoperative anxiety was associated with a greater hospital length of stay, while preoperative depression was associated with twofold risk of postoperative delirium. Therefore, routine preoperative mental health screening could identify high-risk patients and enable targeted perioperative interventions to reduce adverse outcomes.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.040
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Anesthesia and Translational Medicine→Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→