Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Getting a diagnosis

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

The Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) exists in both short and long forms. The original 30-item form of the GDS has been shown to be an effective screening test for depression in a variety of settings. However, its utility in patients with dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT) is questionable. The short, 15-item version of the GDS was developed primarily for brevity and, in particular, for use in populations such as the medically ill or those with dementia, where the longer form might be burdensome. How well this short form works in these populations, however, is largely undetermined. In this paper, the sensitivity and specificity of the 15- and 30-item GDS are compared in a group of patients who were either cognitively intact or had mild DAT. The findings suggest that the short version of the GDS, like its longer predecessor, is an effective screening tool in the cognitively intact. However, in a population of subjects with mild DAT, it does not appear to retain its validity.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Burke, W. J., Roccaforte, W. H., & Wengel, S. P. (1991). The short form of the Geriatric Depression Scale: a comparison with the 30-item form. Journal of geriatric psychiatry and neurology. https://doi.org/10.1177/089198879100400310

Vancouver

Burke WJ, Roccaforte WH, Wengel SP. The short form of the Geriatric Depression Scale: a comparison with the 30-item form. Journal of geriatric psychiatry and neurology. 1991. doi:10.1177/089198879100400310. PMID: 1953971.

BibTeX

@article{burke1991-1953971,
  author  = {Burke, W. J. and Roccaforte, W. H. and Wengel, S. P.},
  title   = {{The short form of the Geriatric Depression Scale: a comparison with the 30-item form}},
  journal = {Journal of geriatric psychiatry and neurology},
  year    = {1991},
  doi     = {10.1177/089198879100400310},
  pmid    = {1953971},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1177/089198879100400310}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Why it matters

This study compared two versions of a depression screening scale and found the short version did not appear to retain its validity in people with mild dementia of the Alzheimer type. It concerns screening for depression, not treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

How this study scored 42/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 1 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 6 of 7; Citations per year 3 of 5; Impact for its field and year 2 of 6; Cited by studies here 3 of 6; Still being cited 3 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration 0 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 41 of the 97 points it could be judged on, which is 42 of 100. Total 42 of 100.41 of the 97 points we could judge = 42 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on institution's track record, so that was left out: it earned 41 of the 97 points we could judge it on, which is 42 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of geriatric psychiatry and neurology)
Journal's citation record 1 / 4 Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology: journal h-index 105 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 1991 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 6 / 7 Cited 734 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 3 / 5 19.8 citations a year over 37 year(s) since 1991
Impact for its field and year 2 / 6 Cited 2.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 3 / 6 Cited by 16 other studies in this library
Still being cited 3 / 4 Cited 98 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Steven P. Wengel: h-index 23 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration 0 / 3 OpenAlex lists 0 institution(s) in 0 countries — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 1953971)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 41 / 97 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 41 of the 97 points we could judge it on is 42 out of 100.
Total 42 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

16 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Getting a diagnosis

Also tagged “palliative”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “palliative”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Getting a diagnosis

See all studies in Getting a diagnosis →