What are the best screening tools for depression and anxiety?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: July 9, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Best Screening Tools for Depression and Anxiety

For depression screening, the PHQ-2/PHQ-9 two-step approach is recommended as the most effective screening tool, while for anxiety screening, the GAD-7 is the preferred instrument with optimal sensitivity and specificity.

Depression Screening Tools

Primary Recommendation: PHQ-2/PHQ-9 Two-Step Approach

  • Step 1: Use the PHQ-2 (first two questions of PHQ-9) as initial screen
    • Questions: "Over the past 2 weeks, have you felt down, depressed, or hopeless?" and "Over the past 2 weeks, have you felt little interest or pleasure in doing things?"
    • Cutoff score: ≥2 indicates need for full PHQ-9 1
  • Step 2: For positive PHQ-2 screens, administer full PHQ-9
    • Optimal cutoff: ≥8 for clinical populations 2
    • Traditional cutoff: ≥10 for general population 3

The PHQ-9 has demonstrated good sensitivity (83%) and specificity (61%) at a cutoff of ≥7 in diverse populations 2. It has strong psychometric properties with Cronbach's alpha of 0.86 4.

Alternative Depression Screening Options

  • Two simple questions: Simply asking about mood and anhedonia may be as effective as longer instruments in primary care settings 1
  • Center for Epidemiologic Study Depression Scale (CES-D): Good option but longer than PHQ-9
  • Beck Depression Inventory: Well-validated but requires more time to complete

Anxiety Screening Tools

Primary Recommendation: GAD-7

  • 7-item scale specifically designed for primary care settings 1
  • Optimal cutoff: ≥8 for good balance of sensitivity and specificity 5
  • Alternative cutoff: ≥10 for higher specificity but lower sensitivity 5
  • Excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.91) 4

Alternative Anxiety Screening Options

  • GAD-2: Ultra-brief 2-item version of GAD-7
    • Cutoff score: ≥3 3
    • Good for initial screening in time-limited settings
  • Mini-SPIN: 3-item version of Social Phobia Inventory
    • Specifically for social anxiety disorder
    • Cutoff score: ≥6 (89% sensitivity, 90% specificity) 1

Implementation Considerations

Screening Algorithm

  1. Initial Visit: Screen all patients using PHQ-2 and GAD-2
  2. Positive Initial Screen: Administer full PHQ-9 and/or GAD-7
  3. Regular Follow-up: Screen at appropriate intervals, especially with:
    • Changes in disease or treatment status
    • Transitions in care
    • Significant life events 1

Clinical Pearls

  • Avoid relying solely on symptom count: Assessment should be phased and consider patient history and risk factors 1
  • Pay attention to the self-harm item on PHQ-9: Consider risk assessment for patients endorsing thoughts of self-harm 1
  • Consider cultural context: Sensitivity and specificity of these tools may vary across different populations 5, 6
  • Ensure follow-up systems: Benefits from screening are unlikely without proper systems for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up 1

Common Pitfalls

  • Overreliance on screening tools: Positive screens should trigger full diagnostic interviews using standard diagnostic criteria 1
  • Using inappropriate cutoffs: Optimal cutoffs may vary by population and setting 1
  • Neglecting comorbidities: Depression and anxiety frequently co-occur and should both be assessed 3
  • Failing to reassess: One-time screening is insufficient; regular reassessment is necessary, especially during transitions of care 1

Both the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 are brief, well-validated measures that can be completed in less than 5 minutes, making them practical for routine clinical use in busy primary care settings 3.

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.