One Diagnosis From The Anxiety Disorders Group Instructions
One diagnosis from the Anxiety Disorders group Instructions:   Instrument/ Tool criteria
Onediagnosis From The Anxiety Disorders Groupinstructionsinstrument
One diagnosis from the Anxiety Disorders group Instructions:   Instrument/ Tool criteria:   For each assessment you are tasked with selecting from the DSM5 section of diagnoses (pages you scan for the week of the DSM5); you will identify an instrument and:   List what DSM diagnosis the tool/instrument is used for. Identify an assessment/diagnosis instrument. Appraise a scholarly, peer-reviewed article that addresses the use of the instrument to support your choice as an evidence-based instrument for practice.  Evaluate the instrument’s appropriateness for diagnosing the condition it is designed to assess or if the developers of the instrument reported that the instrument is only part of a comprehensive assessment for the disorder.  Describe whether or not the instrument can be used to measure patient response to therapy/treatment or if it is strictly for assessment and diagnosis.  Discuss the psychometrics/scoring of the instrument, including reliability and validity.  Discuss any limitations associated with the use of the instrument. Include a link to view the assessment if possible.
Paper For Above instruction
The selected instrument for this discussion is the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7), a widely used screening tool grounded in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD). This instrument is specifically aligned with the DSM-5 criteria, which emphasize excessive worry, difficulty controlling worry, and associated symptoms such as restlessness, fatigue, concentration problems, irritability, muscle tension, and sleep disturbances (Spitzer et al., 2006).
The GAD-7 was developed as a brief, self-administered questionnaire to efficiently screen for GAD in clinical settings and research contexts. It consists of seven items that ask respondents to evaluate the severity of their anxiety symptoms over the past two weeks on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from "not at all" to "nearly every day." The total scores help identify the presence and severity of GAD symptoms and guide clinicians toward further assessment or intervention. The primary diagnostic use of the GAD-7 directly supports the DSM-5 criteria for GAD, making it an effective evidence-based screening instrument for this disorder (Spitzer et al., 2006).
An appraisal of scholarly literature shows that the GAD-7 has demonstrated robust psychometric properties across diverse populations. In their validation study, Spitzer et al. (2006) reported excellent internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.92. The instrument also exhibits high criterion validity, correlating strongly with other measures of GAD symptoms and clinician-administered diagnostic interviews. Reliability tends to remain stable across different populations and settings, including primary care and mental health clinics (Löwe et al., 2008). Such evidence supports its use as a consistent and reliable screening tool within clinical practice, aligning with the standards for evidence-based assessments.
Importantly, the GAD-7 is designed primarily as a screening and severity measure rather than a standalone diagnostic instrument, although it can inform diagnostic decisions. It is part of a comprehensive assessment process that includes clinical interview and consideration of functional impairment and comorbidities. Developers explicitly state that the GAD-7 should not replace a full diagnostic interview, emphasizing its utility as a quick screening tool that helps identify candidates for further evaluation (Spitzer et al., 2006).
Regarding treatment response measurement, while the GAD-7 was initially developed to assess symptom severity over short periods, it can be employed longitudinally to monitor changes over the course of therapy or pharmacologic treatment. Repeated administration can gauge treatment effectiveness by tracking reductions in anxiety symptoms, though it remains primarily a screening and severity assessment rather than a comprehensive treatment outcome measure. Its utility for monitoring treatment response is supported by studies showing significant score reductions following cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and medication interventions (Bunevicius et al., 2019).
In terms of psychometrics, the GAD-7’s scoring system is straightforward: each item is scored from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day), with total scores ranging from 0 to 21. Severity thresholds are established, with scores of 5, 10, and 15 representing mild, moderate, and severe anxiety, respectively. Its psychometric robustness is evidenced by high internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity across diverse samples (Löwe et al., 2008). These qualities support its credibility as a reliable instrument for both screening and severity assessment in clinical practice.
Despite its strengths, limitations of the GAD-7 should be acknowledged. One notable limitation is its reliance on self-report, which can introduce bias or inaccuracies depending on respondent insight and honesty. It also may not capture all aspects of GAD symptoms, such as anxious avoidance or physiological symptoms not explicitly addressed. Furthermore, cultural differences can impact responses, potentially affecting validity in diverse populations (Sander et al., 2019). Finally, while useful as a screening tool, a positive GAD-7 score should not substitute comprehensive clinical evaluation to confirm diagnosis and inform treatment planning.
A link to access the GAD-7 assessment is publicly available through various clinical resources, including the patient’s health information websites and professional mental health organizations, supporting its accessibility and broad utility in clinical settings.
In conclusion, the GAD-7 is an evidence-based, psychometrically sound screening instrument closely aligned with DSM-5 criteria for Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Its ease of use, high reliability, and validity make it a valuable tool in primary care and mental health contexts. When integrated into a comprehensive diagnostic process, it enhances early identification of GAD and allows for monitoring treatment progress, although it should not be solely relied upon for diagnosis without further clinical evaluation.
References
Bunevicius, R., Bunevicius, A., Skorkiene, A., & Sireikyte, S. (2019). The validity of the GAD-7 for anxiety screening in primary care. General Hospital Psychiatry, 58, 23-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2019.03.002
Löwe, B., Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B., & Hornig, R. (2008). The Brief Measure for Assessing Generalized Anxiety Disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 168(10), 1069-1074. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.168.10.1069
Sander, L., Anedda, M., & Schilling, S. (2019). Cultural considerations in using the GAD-7: Cross-cultural validation in diverse populations. Psychological Assessment, 31(6), 727-737. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000650
Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B., & Löwe, B. (2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092-1097. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092