{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05675675675675676, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02837837837837838, 'mean_word_length': 4.571428571428571, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Depression Identification in the Long-Term Care Setting

Abstract This study compared depression identification rates and validity of the currently mandated Minimum Data Set (MDS) and the Geriatric Depression Scale Short Form-15 item (GDS) in a sample of nursing home residents. Results indicate the GDS is a better tool for identifying depression than the MDS. The GDS, MDS Section E1, QI, and OSCAR screened 35%, 23%, 3%, and 4% positive for depression, respectively. Mean sensitivity and specificity for SADS-RDC (gold standard) vs. GDS, MDS Section E1, OSCAR, and QI were .91, .79, .83, and .88, respectively. Chi-square analyses indicated the GDS was the only test, in relation to the SADS-RDC to identify depressed residents p = .001.