Context Little is known about lifetime prevalence or age of onset of DSM-IV disorders. Objective To estimate lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the recently completed National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Design and Setting Nationally representative face-to-face household survey conducted between February 2001 and April 2003 using the fully structured World Health Organization World Mental Health Survey version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Participants Nine thousand two hundred eighty-two English-speaking respondents aged 18 years and older. Main Outcome Measures Lifetime DSM-IV anxiety, mood, impulse-control, and substance use disorders. Results Lifetime prevalence estimates are as follows: anxiety disorders, 28.8%; mood disorders, 20.8%; impulse-control disorders, 24.8%; substance use disorders, 14.6%; any disorder, 46.4%. Median age of onset is much earlier for anxiety (11 years) and impulse-control (11 years) disorders than for substance use (20 years) and mood (30 years) disorders. Half of all lifetime cases start by age 14 years and three fourths by age 24 years. Later onsets are mostly of comorbid conditions, with estimated lifetime risk of any disorder at age 75 years (50.8%) only slightly higher than observed lifetime prevalence (46.4%). Lifetime prevalence estimates are higher in recent cohorts than in earlier cohorts and have fairly stable intercohort differences across the life course that vary in substantively plausible ways among sociodemographic subgroups. Conclusions About half of Americans will meet the criteria for a DSM-IV disorder sometime in their life, with first onset usually in childhood or adolescence. Interventions aimed at prevention or early treatment need to focus on youth.

https://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/faculty/detels/PH150/Kessler_DSMIV_AGP2009.pdf

Lifetime Prevalence and Age-of-Onset Distributions of DSM-IV Disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication

Background Little is known about the general population prevalence or severity of DSM-IV mental disorders. Objective To estimate 12-month prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of DSM-IV anxiety, mood, impulse control, and substance disorders in the recently completed US National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Design and Setting Nationally representative face-to-face household survey conducted between February 2001 and April 2003 using a fully structured diagnostic interview, the World Health Organization World Mental Health Survey Initiative version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Participants Nine thousand two hundred eighty-two English-speaking respondents 18 years and older. Main Outcome Measures Twelve-month DSM-IV disorders. Results Twelve-month prevalence estimates were anxiety, 18.1%; mood, 9.5%; impulse control, 8.9%; substance, 3.8%; and any disorder, 26.2%. Of 12-month cases, 22.3% were classified as serious; 37.3%, moderate; and 40.4%, mild. Fifty-five percent carried only a single diagnosis; 22%, 2 diagnoses; and 23%, 3 or more diagnoses. Latent class analysis detected 7 multivariate disorder classes, including 3 highly comorbid classes representing 7% of the population. Conclusion Although mental disorders are widespread, serious cases are concentrated among a relatively small proportion of cases with high comorbidity.

/pdf/prevalence-severity-and-comorbidity-of-12-month-dsm-iv-54fahxwd1s.pdf

Prevalence, Severity, and Comorbidity of 12-Month DSM-IV Disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication

世界経済・社会統計 = World development indicators

Despite the concern that has been expressed about potential method biases, and the pervasiveness of research settings with the potential to produce them, there is disagreement about whether they really are a problem for researchers in the behavioral sciences. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to explore the current state of knowledge about method biases. First, we explore the meaning of the terms “method” and “method bias” and then we examine whether method biases influence all measures equally. Next, we review the evidence of the effects that method biases have on individual measures and on the covariation between different constructs. Following this, we evaluate the procedural and statistical remedies that have been used to control method biases and provide recommendations for minimizing method bias.

Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It

ContextUncertainties exist about prevalence and correlates of major depressive
disorder (MDD).ObjectiveTo present nationally representative data on prevalence and correlates
of MDD by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria, and on study
patterns and correlates of treatment and treatment adequacy from the recently
completed National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R).DesignFace-to-face household survey conducted from February 2001 to December
2002.SettingThe 48 contiguous United States.ParticipantsHousehold residents ages 18 years or older (N = 9090) who responded
to the NCS-R survey.Main Outcome MeasuresPrevalence and correlates of MDD using the World Health Organization's
(WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), 12-month severity
with the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR),
the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and the WHO disability assessment scale
(WHO-DAS). Clinical reinterviews used the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV.ResultsThe prevalence of CIDI MDD for lifetime was 16.2% (95% confidence interval
[CI], 15.1-17.3) (32.6-35.1 million US adults) and for 12-month was 6.6% (95%
CI, 5.9-7.3) (13.1-14.2 million US adults). Virtually all CIDI 12-month cases
were independently classified as clinically significant using the QIDS-SR,
with 10.4% mild, 38.6% moderate, 38.0% severe, and 12.9% very severe. Mean
episode duration was 16 weeks (95% CI, 15.1-17.3). Role impairment as measured
by SDS was substantial as indicated by 59.3% of 12-month cases with severe
or very severe role impairment. Most lifetime (72.1%) and 12-month (78.5%)
cases had comorbid CIDI/DSM-IV disorders, with MDD
only rarely primary. Although 51.6% (95% CI, 46.1-57.2) of 12-month cases
received health care treatment for MDD, treatment was adequate in only 41.9%
(95% CI, 35.9-47.9) of these cases, resulting in 21.7% (95% CI, 18.1-25.2)
of 12-month MDD being adequately treated. Sociodemographic correlates of treatment
were far less numerous than those of prevalence.ConclusionsMajor depressive disorder is a common disorder, widely distributed in
the population, and usually associated with substantial symptom severity and
role impairment. While the recent increase in treatment is encouraging, inadequate
treatment is a serious concern. Emphasis on screening and expansion of treatment
needs to be accompanied by a parallel emphasis on treatment quality improvement.

/pdf/the-epidemiology-of-major-depressive-disorder-results-from-2kfxdgis3p.pdf

The epidemiology of major depressive disorder: results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R).

Context Although outreach and enhanced treatment interventions improve depression outcomes, uptake has been poor in part because purchasers lack information on their return on investment. Objective To estimate the costs and benefits of enhanced depression care for workers from the societal and employer-purchaser perspectives. Design Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses using state-transition Markov models. Simulated movements between health states were based on probabilities drawn from the clinical literature. Participants Hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old workers. Intervention Enhanced depression care consisting of a depression screen and care management for those depressed vs usual care. Main Outcome Measures Our base-case cost-effectiveness analysis was from the societal perspective; costs and quality-adjusted life-years were used to compute the incremental cost-effectiveness of the intervention relative to usual care. A secondary cost-benefit analysis from the employer's perspective tracked monetary costs and monetary benefits accruing to employers during a 5-year time horizon. Results From the societal perspective, screening and depression care management for workers result in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $19 976 per quality-adjusted life-year relative to usual care. These results are consistent with recent primary care effectiveness trials and within the range for medical interventions usually covered by employer-sponsored insurance. From the employer's perspective, enhanced depression care yields a net cumulative benefit of $2895 after 5 years. In 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, these findings were robust to a variety of assumptions. Conclusion If these results can be replicated in effectiveness trials directly assessing effects on work outcomes, they suggest that enhanced treatment quality programs for depression are cost-beneficial to purchasers.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/articlepdf/209907/yoa50227_1345_1353.pdf

The Costs and Benefits of Enhanced Depression Care to Employers

Although surveys designed to estimate the prevalence and correlates of mental disorders in the workplace as well as in larger community samples have been carried out in the United States since the end of World War II,1–3 it was not until the early 1980s that the development of fully structured diagnostic interviews made it possible to assess specific mental disorders with accuracy in such assessments.4,5 Several large-scale surveys using fully structured psychiatric diagnostic interviews have been carried out since that time. However, changes in the criteria for major depression in successive editions of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) have hampered efforts to replicate results. The most recent nationally representative population data on the prevalence and correlates of depression come from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R).6 The NCS-R data also provide useful information about the workplace consequence of depression.7 The current report presents an overview of NCS-R results on the prevalence and correlates of depression and relates these results to those in previous studies.

/pdf/the-prevalence-and-correlates-of-workplace-depression-in-the-4two58no6m.pdf

The prevalence and correlates of workplace depression in the national comorbidity survey replication.

Selective prescribing led to overestimation of the benefits of lipid-lowering drugs

STAR * D (Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression) continues to stimulate debate. The landmark trial demonstrated the feasibility of large-scale, community-based studies conducted without pharmaceutical company support. The results provided insight into nonresponse to initial treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and alternatives for second- and third-line treatment options and suggested opportunities for personalized approaches to depression care. However, initial and one-year remission rates (28% and 70%, respectively) suggest that important goals for treatment of this disabling disease remain out of reach and that the bar for antidepressants has been set far too low.

https://ps.psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/ps.2009.60.11.1466

The STAR*D trial: revealing the need for better treatments.

Purpose

To address poor patient compliance with antihypertensives, clinicians and researchers need accurate measures of adherence with prescribed regimens. Although self-reports are often the only means available in routine practice, their accuracy and agreement with other data sources remain questionable.



Methods

A telephone survey was conducted on 200 hypertensive patients treated with a single antihypertensive agent in a large health maintenance organization (HMO) or a Veterans Affairs medical center (VAMC) to obtain self-reports of the frequency of missing antihypertensive therapy. We then analyzed records of all filled prescriptions to calculate the number of days that patients actually had antihypertensive medications available for use. Agreement between the two data sources was measured with correlation coefficients and kappa statistics. Logistic regression models were used to identify demographic, clinical and psychosocial correlates of overstating compliance.



Results

There was very poor agreement between self-reported compliance and days actually covered by filled prescriptions (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.15; 95%CI: 0.01, 0.28). Very poor agreement was also observed between a categorical measure of self-reported compliance (ever vs. never missing a dose) and categories of actual compliance defined by filled prescriptions (  80% of days covered; kappa = 0.12, 95%CI: −0.02, 0.26). Surprisingly, few factors were associated with inaccurate self-reporting in either crude or adjusted analyses; fewer visits to health care providers was significantly associated with overstating compliance.



Conclusions

Compliance was markedly overstated in this sample of patients and few characteristics identified those who reported more versus less accurately. Clinicians and researchers who rely on self-reports should be aware of these limits and should take steps to enhance their accuracy. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Philip S. Wang

Papers

The Costs and Benefits of Enhanced Depression Care to Employers

The prevalence and correlates of workplace depression in the national comorbidity survey replication.

Selective prescribing led to overestimation of the benefits of lipid-lowering drugs

The STAR*D trial: revealing the need for better treatments.

How well do patients report noncompliance with antihypertensive medications?: a comparison of self-report versus filled prescriptions