Geographical variation in rates of common mental disorders in Britain: Prospective cohort study

2005 ◽  
Vol 187 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Weich ◽  
Liz Twigg ◽  
Glyn Lewis ◽  
Kelvyn Jones
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Geographical Variation ◽  
Longitudinal Research ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Economic Deprivation ◽  
Household Level ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Ward Level

BackgroundThere is little geographical variation in the prevalence of the common mental disorders. However, there is little longitudinal research.AimsTo estimate variance in rates of common mental disorders at individual, household and electoral ward levels prospectively.MethodA 12-month cohort study of 7659 adults aged 16–74 years in 4338 private households, in 626 electoral wards. Data were collected as part of the British Household Panel Survey. Common mental disorders were assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ). Ward-level socio-economic deprivation was measured using the Carstairs index.ResultsLess than 1% of total variance, in onset and maintenance of common mental disorders and change in GHQ score between waves, occurred at ward level. However, 12% of variance, which is a statistically significant difference, was found at household level (a much smaller geographical unit) and this difference remained after further analyses.ConclusionsWard level socio-economic deprivation does not influence the onset and maintenance of common mental disorders in Britain but local factors at the household level do. Reasons for this remain unclear.

Social roles and the gender difference in rates of the common mental disorders in Britain: a 7-year, population-based cohort study

2001 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 1055-1064 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. WEICH ◽  
A. SLOGGETT ◽  
G. LEWIS
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Gender Difference ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Social Roles ◽  
Social Role ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Reverse Causality ◽  
Men And Women

Background. It is not known why the most common mental disorders (CMD), anxiety and depression, are more prevalent among women. This gradient has not been explained by differences in the number or type of social roles occupied by men and women. Given the dearth of longitudinal studies, these negative findings could reflect reverse causality, if men with CMD relinquish social roles more readily than women.Methods. Cohort study using data from the first seven (annual) waves of the British Household Panel Survey. The prevalence of CMD was assessed using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), 12 months after ascertaining occupancy of five social roles. Of 12379 participants aged 16–70, 9947 completed the GHQ on at least two consecutive occasions, resulting in 44139 paired observations. Random effects models adjusted for the correlation of repeated measures and for baseline GHQ score.Results. The odds ratio for the gender difference in the future prevalence of CMD (adjusted for baseline GHQ score) was 1·92 (95% CI 1·75–2·10). Neither the number or type of social roles occupied, nor socio-economic status explained the gender difference in these conditions (adjusted OR 1·82, 95% CI 1·66–1·99). While CMD at baseline was associated with a subsequent reduction in social role occupancy, this did not vary between men and women.Conclusions. Gender differences in CMD were not explained by differences in the number or type of social roles occupied by men and women, or by reverse causality. Future studies should consider characteristics of social roles, such as demand, control and reward.

scholarly journals ERICA: prevalence of common mental disorders in Brazilian adolescents

2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (suppl 1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia S Lopes ◽  
Gabriela de Azevedo Abreu ◽  
Debora França dos Santos ◽  
Paulo Rossi Menezes ◽  
Kenia Mara Baiocchi de Carvalho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
School Administrators ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
School Type ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Adolescent Students ◽  
The North ◽  
Significant Difference

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To describe the prevalence of common mental disorders in Brazilian adolescent students, according to geographical macro-regions, school type, sex, and age. METHODS We evaluated 74,589 adolescents who participated in the Cardiovascular Risk Study in Adolescents (ERICA), a cross-sectional, national, school-based study conducted in 2013-2014 in cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants. A self-administered questionnaire and an electronic data collector were employed. The presence of common mental disorders was assessed using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). We estimated prevalence and 95% confidence intervals of common mental disorders by sex, age, and school type, in Brazil and in the macro-regions, considering the sample design. RESULTS The prevalence of common mental disorders was of 30.0% (95%CI 29.2-30.8), being higher among girls (38.4%; 95%CI 37.1-39.7) when compared to boys (21.6%; 95%CI 20.5-22.8), and among adolescents who were from 15 to 17 years old (33.6%; 95%CI 32.2-35.0) compared to those aged between 12 and 14 years (26.7%; 95%CI 25.8-27.6). The prevalence of common mental disorders increased with age for both sexes, always higher in girls (ranging from 28.1% at 12 years to 44.1% at 17 years) than in boys (ranging from 18.5% at 12 years to 27.7% at 17 years). We did not observe any significant difference by macro-region or school type. Stratified analyses showed higher prevalence of common mental disorders among girls aged from 15 to 17 years of private schools in the North region (53.1; 95%CI 46.8-59.4). CONCLUSIONS The high prevalence of common mental disorders among adolescents and the fact that the symptoms are often vague mean these disorders are not so easily identified by school administrators or even by health services. The results of this study can help the proposition of more specific prevention and control measures, focused on highest risk subgroups.

scholarly journals Detecting common mental disorders in primary care in India: a comparison of five screening questionnaires

2007 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Patel ◽  
R. Araya ◽  
N. Chowdhary ◽  
M. King ◽  
B. Kirkwood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Diagnostic Interview ◽  
Systematic Sampling ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Primary Care Settings ◽  
Self Reporting Questionnaire ◽  
Distress Scale

BackgroundScreening of patients for common mental disorders (CMDs) is needed in primary-care management programmes. This study aimed to compare the screening properties of five widely used questionnaires.MethodAdult attenders in five primary-care settings in India were recruited through systematic sampling. Four questionnaires were administered, in pairs, in random order to participants: the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ, 12 items); the Primary Health Questionnaire (PHQ, nine items); the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10, 10 items), and from which we could extract the score of the shorter 6-item K6; and the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ, 20 items). All participants were interviewed with a structured lay diagnostic interview, the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R).ResultsComplete data were available for 598 participants (participation rate 99.3%). All five questionnaires showed moderate to high discriminating ability; the GHQ and SRQ showed the best results. All five showed moderate to high degrees of correlation with one another, the poorest being between the two shortest questionnaires, K6 and PHQ. All five had relatively good internal consistency. However, the positive predictive value (PPV) of the questionnaires compared with the diagnostic interview ranged from 51% to 77% at the optimal cut-off scores.ConclusionsThere is little difference in the ability of these questionnaires to identify cases accurately, but none showed high PPVs without a considerable compromise on sensitivity. Hence, the choice of an optimum cut-off score that yields the best balance between sensitivity and PPV may need to be tailored to individual settings, with a higher cut-off being recommended in resource-limited primary-care settings.

scholarly journals Preconception prediction of expectant fathers' mental health: 20-year cohort study from adolescence

BJPsych Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 58-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Spry ◽  
Rebecca Giallo ◽  
Margarita Moreno-Betancur ◽  
Jacqui Macdonald ◽  
Denise Becker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Common Mental Disorder ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Adolescent And Young Adult ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Expectant Fathers

We examined prospective associations between men's common mental disorders in the decades prior to offspring conception and subsequent paternal antenatal mental health problems. Data came from a prospective intergenerational cohort study which assessed common mental disorder nine times from age 14 to 29 years, and in the third trimester of subsequent pregnancies to age 35 years (N = 295 pregnancies to 214 men). Men with histories of adolescent and young adult common mental disorders were over four times more likely to experience antenatal mental health problems. Future research identifying modifiable perinatal factors that counteract preconception risk would provide further targets for intervention.Declaration of interestNone.

scholarly journals Assessing and predicting adolescent and early adulthood common mental disorders using electronic primary care data: analysis of a prospective cohort study (ALSPAC) in Southwest England

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e053624
Author(s):  
Daniel Smith ◽  
Kathryn Willan ◽  
Stephanie L Prady ◽  
Josie Dickerson ◽  
Gillian Santorelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Prospective Cohort Study ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Primary Care Data ◽  
Time Point

ObjectivesWe aimed to examine agreement between common mental disorders (CMDs) from primary care records and repeated CMD questionnaire data from ALSPAC (the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children) over adolescence and young adulthood, explore factors affecting CMD identification in primary care records, and construct models predicting ALSPAC-derived CMDs using only primary care data.Design and settingProspective cohort study (ALSPAC) in Southwest England with linkage to electronic primary care records.ParticipantsPrimary care records were extracted for 11 807 participants (80% of 14 731 eligible). Between 31% (3633; age 15/16) and 11% (1298; age 21/22) of participants had both primary care and ALSPAC CMD data.Outcome measuresALSPAC outcome measures were diagnoses of suspected depression and/or CMDs. Primary care outcome measure were Read codes for diagnosis, symptoms and treatment of depression/CMDs. For each time point, sensitivities and specificities for primary care CMD diagnoses were calculated for predicting ALSPAC-derived measures of CMDs, and the factors associated with identification of primary care-based CMDs in those with suspected ALSPAC-derived CMDs explored. Lasso (least absolute selection and shrinkage operator) models were used at each time point to predict ALSPAC-derived CMDs using only primary care data, with internal validation by randomly splitting data into 60% training and 40% validation samples.ResultsSensitivities for primary care diagnoses were low for CMDs (range: 3.5%–19.1%) and depression (range: 1.6%–34.0%), while specificities were high (nearly all >95%). The strongest predictors of identification in the primary care data for those with ALSPAC-derived CMDs were symptom severity indices. The lasso models had relatively low prediction rates, especially in the validation sample (deviance ratio range: −1.3 to 12.6%), but improved with age.ConclusionsPrimary care data underestimate CMDs compared to population-based studies. Improving general practitioner identification, and using free-text or secondary care data, is needed to improve the accuracy of models using clinical data.

A 12-Month Prospective Cohort Study of Symptoms of Common Mental Disorders Among European Professional Footballers

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 487-492 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Gouttebarge ◽  
Haruhito Aoki ◽  
Evert A. L. M. Verhagen ◽  
Gino M. M. J. Kerkhoffs
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Prospective Cohort Study ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Common Mental Disorders

An Examination of the Efficiency of the 12-Item SPHERE Questionnaire as a Screening Instrument for Common Mental Disorders in Primary Care

2003 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 236-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Clarke ◽  
Dean P. Mckenzie
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Psychological Health ◽  
Psychiatric Diagnosis ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
General Health Questionnaire ◽  
Screening Instrument ◽  
Current Form ◽  
Health Report ◽  
A Current

Objective: To further examine the screening capabilities (sensitivity, specificity, etc.) of the 12-item Somatic and Psychological Health Report (SPHERE) questionnaire. Method: A more extensive examination was carried out on data presented in a recent report. Results: The sensitivities of the questionnaire, scored in three different ways, ranged from 100% to 47%. Specificities ranged from 18% to 72%. As a global screen for mental disorder it had a very high false-positive rate, with, in one sample, 83% of patients screening positive while only 27% had a current psychiatric diagnosis, and in the other sample 55% screened positive with only 13% having a current psychiatric diagnosis. The PSYCH-6 scale used by itself had similar properties to the 30-item General Health Questionnaire from which it was derived. The addition of the scale measuring fatigue (SOMA-6) increased or decreased specificity depending on how it was combined with the PSYCH-6 scale. Conclusion: The evidence is insufficient to recommend the 12-item SPHERE, in its current form, as a screening instrument for DSM-IV mental disorders in general practice, as the specificity is inadequate. Ways of raising the threshold for caseness need to be explored. The argument for adding a measure of fatigue to a general screening measure is not supported.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document