Depression (differential diagnoses)

About: Depression (differential diagnoses) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 56557 publications have been published within this topic receiving 2048357 citations.

Anxiety and depression in adults with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract: Adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are thought to be at disproportionate risk of developing mental health comorbidities, with anxiety and depression being considered most prominent amongst these Yet, no systematic review has been carried out to date to examine rates of both anxiety and depression focusing specifically on adults with ASD This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the rates of anxiety and depression in adults with ASD and the impact of factors such as assessment methods and presence of comorbid intellectual disability (ID) diagnosis on estimated prevalence rates Electronic database searches for studies published between January 2000 and September 2017 identified a total of 35 studies, including 30 studies measuring anxiety (n = 26 070; mean age = 309, sd = 62 years) and 29 studies measuring depression (n = 26 117; mean age = 311, sd = 68 years) The pooled estimation of current and lifetime prevalence for adults with ASD were 27% and 42% for any anxiety disorder, and 23% and 37% for depressive disorder Further analyses revealed that the use of questionnaire measures and the presence of ID may significantly influence estimates of prevalence The current literature suffers from a high degree of heterogeneity in study method and an overreliance on clinical samples These results highlight the importance of community-based studies and the identification and inclusion of well-characterized samples to reduce heterogeneity and bias in estimates of prevalence for comorbidity in adults with ASD and other populations with complex psychiatric presentations

Are Subjects in Pharmacological Treatment Trials of Depression Representative of Patients in Routine Clinical Practice

Abstract: Objective: The methods used to evaluate the efficacy of antidepressants differ from treatment for depression in routine clinical practice. The rigorous inclusion/exclusion criteria used to select subjects for participation in efficacy studies potentially limit the generalizability of these trials’ results. It is unknown how much impact these criteria have on the representativeness of subjects in efficacy trials. This study estimated the proportion of depressed patients treated in routine clinical practice who would meet standard inclusion/exclusion criteria for an efficacy trial. Method: A total of 803 individuals, aged 16–65 years, who were seen at intake at an outpatient practice underwent a thorough diagnostic evaluation, including the administration of semistructured diagnostic interviews; 346 patients had current major depression. Common inclusion/exclusion criteria used in efficacy studies of antidepressants were applied to the depressed patients to determine how many would have qualified for an efficacy trial. Results: Approximately one-sixth of the 346 depressed patients would have been excluded from an efficacy trial because they had a bipolar or psychotic subtype of depression. The presence of a comorbid anxiety or substance use disorder, insufficient severity of depressive symptoms, or current suicidal ideation would have excluded 86.0% (N=252) of the remaining 293 outpatients with nonpsychotic unipolar major depressive disorder from an antidepressant efficacy trial. Conclusions: Subjects treated in antidepressant trials represent a minority of patients treated for major depression in routine clinical practice. These results show that antidepressant efficacy trials tend to evaluate a subset of depressed individuals with a specific clinical profile.

Neuropsychiatric aspects of multi-infarct dementia and dementia of the Alzheimer type

Abstract: • Delusions, depression, and hallucinations were assessed in 30 patients with dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT) and 15 with multi-infarct dementia (MID). The nature and prevalence of delusions did not distinguish DAT from MID: delusions were present at the time of examination in 30% of patients with DAT and in 40% of patients with MID, and had occurred at some time in the course of the illness in half the patients of each diagnostic group. Delusions were primarily paranoid in type and involved elementary misbeliefs concerning theft or infidelity. Depression was significantly more common in MID than DAT. Seventeen percent of patients with DAT had depressive symptoms; none with severe depression were identified. Four of 15 patients with MID exhibited major depressive episodes and 60% manifested depressive symptoms. Depression and delusions were not deducted in patients with severe dementia. Hallucinations occurred in both diagnostic groups but were not common: one patient with DAT and one with MID had auditory hallucinations, and three patients with MID had visual hallucinations.