Examining the classification accuracy of GAD-7 and PHQ-9 against the QuickSCID-5 in Canadian undergraduates: Improving post-secondary student mental health screening

<b>Background:</b> The classification accuracy of the General Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) in post-secondary students remains uncertain. <b>Methods:</b> Undergraduate students completed a survey (<i>n</i> = 159) and QuickSCID-5 (<i>n</i> = 130). Sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristics were calculated, and alternative scoring strategies were explored. <b>Results:</b> Most students identified as first-year, Canadian, and female. Among survey respondents, 42% (GAD-7) and 35% (PHQ-9) scored >10. Most students with high stress and GAD-7 scores did not meet the criteria for GAD. At a screening cut-off of >10, sensitivity and specificity were: 80.6/72.3% (GAD-7) and 92.9/72.4% (PHQ-9), respectively. Preliminary evidence supported moderate classification accuracy of GAD-7 (AUC = 0.78) for detecting GAD, but poor accuracy for detecting other disorders. PHQ-9 showed high classification accuracy (AUC = 0.92) for depression; preliminary evidence supported improved accuracy with alternative scoring. <b>Conclusions:</b> While PHQ-9 appears to be a useful screening measure, findings suggest the GAD-7 may capture stress rather than clinical anxiety.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of American College Health
Published
2026-01-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2025.2596075
Primary Topic
Mental Health Treatment and Access
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Examining the classification accuracy of GAD-7 and PHQ-9 against the QuickSCID-5 in Canadian undergraduates: Improving post-secondary student mental health screening

Anne Cecilia Duffy, Pedro Elkind Velmovitsky, Nathan King, Jennifer E. Thannhauser et al.
Journal of American College Health
Mental Health Treatment and Access
article

Examining the classification accuracy of GAD-7 and PHQ-9 against the QuickSCID-5 in Canadian undergraduates: Improving post-secondary student mental health screening

Anne Cecilia Duffy, Pedro Elkind Velmovitsky, Nathan King, Jennifer E. Thannhauser, Noah Furlani, Andrew C. H. Szeto, Thomas Qiao, Scott B. Patten, Hews-Girard Julia, Charles D G Keown-Stoneman, Gina Dimitropoulos
article en

Abstract

<b>Background:</b> The classification accuracy of the General Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) in post-secondary students remains uncertain. <b>Methods:</b> Undergraduate students completed a survey (<i>n</i> = 159) and QuickSCID-5 (<i>n</i> = 130). Sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristics were calculated, and alternative scoring strategies were explored. <b>Results:</b> Most students identified as first-year, Canadian, and female. Among survey respondents, 42% (GAD-7) and 35% (PHQ-9) scored >10. Most students with high stress and GAD-7 scores did not meet the criteria for GAD. At a screening cut-off of >10, sensitivity and specificity were: 80.6/72.3% (GAD-7) and 92.9/72.4% (PHQ-9), respectively. Preliminary evidence supported moderate classification accuracy of GAD-7 (AUC = 0.78) for detecting GAD, but poor accuracy for detecting other disorders. PHQ-9 showed high classification accuracy (AUC = 0.92) for depression; preliminary evidence supported improved accuracy with alternative scoring. <b>Conclusions:</b> While PHQ-9 appears to be a useful screening measure, findings suggest the GAD-7 may capture stress rather than clinical anxiety.

Journal of American College Health
3M (United States) (US), University of Calgary (CA), University of Toronto (CA), Queen's University (CA), Alberta Children's Hospital (CA), Centre for Mental Health (GB), University of Oxford (GB), St Michael’s Hospital (IE), Digital China Health (China) (CN), Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Mental Health Treatment and Access
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.