SynthesisEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2026
Cross-cultural validity of the generalized anxiety disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7): a systematic review and standardized assessment.
Synthesis in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2026. 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.
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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item Scale (GAD-7) is a brief self-reported measure for screening for anxiety symptoms. However, the evidence about its cross-cultural validity is fragmentary and usually focused on specific settings. Therefore, we aimed to critically review and synthesize the existing evidence about the cross-cultural validity of the GAD-7.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of studies assessing the cross-cultural validity of the GAD-7 in following the PRISMA guidelines. Additionally, the quality of the studies was assessed following the COSMIN guidelines, and the quality of the evidence was assessed with the GRADE. Data were synthesized narratively.
resultsOut of 1,965 unique records, 9 unique studies were deemed eligible for the COSMIN appraisal and the narrative synthesis (total sample: 11,894, 53.7% females and 20 different cultural groups). Most studies (7) had adequate quality and showed evidenced of the unitary structure of the GAD-7 across cultural groups. In 4 studies also assessing possible cultural bias, the effect on the general score was deemed negligible.
conclusionsThe evidence about the cross-cultural validity of the GAD-7 is very limited. Although more research is needed, the evidence available shows that the GAD-7 could be a cross-culturally valid tool for the assessment of anxiety symptoms in clinical contexts and epidemiological studies. Until new high-quality evidence will be available, these results would constitute a key first step for supporting the use of the GAD-7 in multi-cultural clinical settings and to inform clinical, public health and global health decision making in relation to anxiety.
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.