Articlebronze2018

Validity of the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier for major depressive disorder

Mark A. Zimmerman · Jacob A. Martin · Patrick T. McGonigal · Lauren M. Harris · Sophie Kerr · Caroline E. Balling +3 more

58 citations0/0 files storedDepression and Anxiety

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes Treatment of Major Depression Mental Health and Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: DSM-5 introduced the anxious distress specifier in recognition of the clinical significance of anxiety in depressed patients. Recent studies that supported the validity of the specifier did not use measures that were designed to assess the criteria of the specifier but instead approximated the DSM-5 criteria from scales that were part of an existing data base. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined the validity of the specifier diagnosed with a semistructured interview. METHODS: Two hundred sixty patients with a principal diagnosis of major depressive disorder were evaluated with semistructured diagnostic interviews. The patients were rated on clinician rating scales of depression, anxiety and irritability, and completed self-report measures. RESULTS: Approximately three-quarters of the depressed patients met the criteria for the anxious distress specifier. Patients with anxious distress had a higher frequency of anxiety disorders, particularly panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder, as well as higher scores on measures of anxiety, depression, and anger. The patients meeting the anxious distress subtype reported higher rates of drug use disorders, poorer functioning during the week before the evaluation, and poorer coping ability compared to the patients who did not meet the anxious distress specifier. Moreover, anxious distress was associated with poorer functioning and coping after controlling for the presence of an anxiety disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study indicate that anxious distress is common in depressed patients and support the validity of the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 58 citations exist upstream.

References

1960A RATING SCALE FOR DEPRESSION 1959THE ASSESSMENT OF ANXIETY STATES BY RATING 1978A Diagnostic Interview 1993The de Facto US Mental and Addictive Disorders Service System 2018Epidemiology of Adult DSM-5 Major Depressive Disorder and Its Specifiers in the United States 2005Anxiety Disorders and Risk for Suicidal Ideation and Suicide Attempts 2013Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID)2004Clinical Utility as a Criterion for Revising Psychiatric Diagnoses

Cited by

2020A comparison of the dimensionality of the Hamilton Rating Scale for anxiety and the DSM-5 Anxious-Distress Specifier Interview 2020Associations between (sub) clinical stress- and anxiety symptoms in mentally healthy individuals and in major depression: a cross-sectional clinical study 2019Depressive Symptom Network Associated With Comorbid Anxiety in Late-Life Depression 2020Is the DSM-5 Anxious Distress Specifier Interview a valid measure of anxiety in patients with generalized anxiety disorder: A comparison to the Hamilton Anxiety Scale

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.