Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21898134›Full record

SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2011

Accuracy of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale as a screening tool in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Andrea Vodermaier, Roanne D Millman

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03763825 (A Pilot Trial of the Mini-AFTERc Intervention to Manage Fear of Cancer Recurrence in Breast Cancer Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 154 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
154citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03763825 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

A Pilot Trial of the Mini-AFTERc Intervention to Manage Fear of Cancer Recurrence in Breast Cancer Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of St AndrewsRan2019 to 2020Enrolled133ConditionsBreast Cancer, Fear of CancerArmsMini-AFTERc
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

154 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. What is the evidence for mirtazapine in treating cancer-related symptomatology? A systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. An allied health rehabilitation program for patients following surgery for abdomino-pelvic cancer: a feasibility and pilot clinical study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

94 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Andrea VodermaierDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada. avoderma@psych.ubc.ca
Roanne D Millman

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research #AQC83559
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) is the most extensively validated scale for screening emotional distress in cancer patients. However, thresholds for clinical decision making vary widely across studies. A meta-analysis was conducted with the aim of identifying optimal, empirically derived cut-offs.

methodsPubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO databases were searched for studies that compared the HADS total and its subscale scores against a semi-structured or structured clinical interview as a reference standard with regard to its screening efficacy for any mental disorders and depressive disorders alone. Separate pooled analyses were conducted for single or two adjacent thresholds. A total of 28 studies (inter-rater agreement, κ = 0.86) were included.

resultsThe best thresholds for screening for mental disorders were 10 or 11 on the HADS total (sensitivity 0.80; specificity 0.74), 5 on the HADS depression subscale (sensitivity 0.84; specificity 0.50), and 7 or 8 on the HADS anxiety subscale (sensitivity 0.73; specificity 0.65). Respective thresholds for depression screening were 15 for the HADS total (sensitivity 0.87; specificity 0.88), 7 for the HADS depression subscale (sensitivity 0.86; specificity 0.81), and 10 or 11 for the HADS anxiety subscale (sensitivity 0.63; specificity 0.83).

conclusionsThe HADS anxiety subscale performed worse than the total and the depression subscales for both indicators. Diagnostic accuracy varied widely by threshold but was consistently superior for depression screening than for screening of any mental disorder.

Indexed as

AnxietyMass ScreeningNeoplasmsDepressionFemaleHumansMalePsychiatric Status Rating Scales

Identifiers

PMID21898134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.