CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 512Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyTreatment of Major DepressionNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

A Population-Based Twin Study of Lifetime Major Depression in Men and Women

Kendler, Kenneth S., Prescott, Carol A.·1999·Archives of General Psychiatry
DOI 10.1001/archpsyc.56.1.39
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Women report higher rates of major depression (MD) than men. Although genetic factors play an important etiologic role in MD, we are uncertain whether genetic factors are of equal importance in men and women, and whether the same genetic factors predispose men and women to MD. Methods We obtained, by telephone interview, a lifetime history of MD, defined by the DSM-III-R, from 3790 complete male-male, female-female, and male-female twin pairs, identified through a population-based registry. Results were analyzed using probandwise concordance, odds ratios, and biometrical twin modeling. Results The odds ratios (plus tetrachoric correlations) for lifetime MD were as follows: (1) male-male monozygotic, 3.29 (+0.37); (2) male-male dizygotic, 1.86 (+0.20); (3) female-female monozygotic, 3.02 (+0.39); (4) female-female dizygotic, 1.59 (+0.18); and (5) male-female dizygotic, 1.39 (+0.11). In the best-fitting twin model, the heritability of liability to MD was the same in men and women and equal to 39%, while the remaining 61% of the variance in liability was due to individual-specific environment. We rejected, with only modest confidence, the hypothesis that the genetic risk factors for MD were the same in men and women. The best-fitting model estimated the genetic correlation in the liability to MD in the 2 sexes to be +0.57. While we found no evidence to suggest a violation of the equal environment assumption, MD was less common in women from opposite-sex vs same-sex tw…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archpsyc.56.1.39

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kendler, K. S., & Prescott, C. A.
Affiliations
Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Archives of General Psychiatry
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
1999-01-01
Volume
56
Issue
1
Pages
39
ISSN
0003-990X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/archpsyc.56.1.39
OpenAlex
W2060606855
Cited by
512
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 17
FWCI
13.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of General Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k05mh001277-05, MH-40828)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH/AA 49492, MH-01277, R01MH040828, MH 40828)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
major depressive disorder, heritability, genetic risk factors, sex differences, monozygotic twins, dizygotic twins, genetic correlation, environmental factors, twin concordance, sex differences in gene expression
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Depressive Disorder, Diseases in Twins, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Genetic, Registries, Risk Factors, Sex Factors, Twins, Dizygotic, Twins, Monozygotic, Virginia, Sex Distribution, Genetic Predisposition to Disease

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review