ArticleJournal of rehabilitation research and development2016
Implementation of a brief anxiety assessment and evaluation in a Department of Veterans Affairs geriatric primary care clinic.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation research and development, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Anxiety disorders are common and debilitating in older individuals, yet anxiety is often not formally assessed in primary care. We conducted a quality improvement project to examine the feasibility of implementing a brief anxiety assessment, the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI), in a Department of Veterans Affairs geriatric primary care clinic. We compared the GAI with a depression assessment, the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15). Fifty older Veterans (mean = 78.5 +/- 7.4 yr) completed the GAI and GDS-15. Mean completion time and feedback to patients was brief (6.20 min; n = 10). Good internal consistency (alpha = 0.82) was found for GAI scores. Patients with psychiatric diagnoses obtained significantly higher GAI scores (mean = 4.73 +/- 1.15) compared with patients without psychiatric diagnoses (mean = 1.15 +/- 1.86, t(11.46) = -3.10, p = 0.01). Findings suggest that the GAI is acceptable to patients but may not be suitable for differentiating anxiety symptoms or disorders from depression. Interdisciplinary team members continued to implement the GAI after project completion to screen for and track anxiety symptoms in our geriatric primary care patients. Detecting anxiety with the GAI had the benefit of allowing providers to initiate conversations about available treatments and track symptoms as part of noting treatment progress.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.