Screening for Depression in Elderly Primary Care Patients:  A Comparison of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies—Depression Scale and the Geriatric Depression Scale

Jeffrey M. Lyness, MD; Tamson Kelly Noel, MS; Christopher Cox, PhD; Deborah A. King, PhD; Yeates Conwell, MD; Eric D. Caine, MD
Arch Intern Med. 1997;157(4):449-454. doi:10.1001/archinte.1997.00440250107012.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background:  Later-life depressive disorders are a major public health problem in primary care settings. A validated screening instrument might aid in the recognition of depression. However, available findings from younger patients may not generalize to older persons, and existing studies of screening instruments in older patient samples have suffered substantial methodological limitations.

Methods:  One hundred thirty patients 60 years or older attending 3 primary care internists' practices participated in the study. Two screening scales were used: the Center for Epidemiologic Studies—Depression Scale (CES-D) and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). The Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition, Revised, was used to establish "gold standard" diagnoses including major and minor depressive disorders. Receiver operating curve analysis was used to determine each scale's operating characteristics.

Results:  Both the CES-D and the GDS had excellent properties in screening for major depression. The optimum cutoff point for the CES-D was 21, yielding a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 87%. The optimum cutoff point for the GDS was 10, yielding a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 84%. A shorter version of the GDS had a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 81% using a cutoff point of 5. All scales lost accuracy when used to detect minor depression or the presence of any depressive diagnosis.

Conclusions:  The CES-D and the GDS have excellent properties for use as screening instruments for major depression in older primary care patients. Because the GDS's yes or no format may ease administration, primary care clinicians should consider its routine use in their practices.Arch Intern Med. 1997;157:449-454


Sign In to Access Full Content

Don't have Access?

Register and get free email Table of Contents alerts, saved searches, PowerPoint downloads, CME quizzes, and more

Subscribe for full-text access to content from 1998 forward and a host of useful features

Activate your current subscription (AMA members and current subscribers)

Purchase Online Access to this article for 24 hours





Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).
Submit a Comment


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 281

Sign In to Access Full Content

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.