Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gender Disadvantage and Reproductive Health Risk Factors for Common Mental Disorders in Women: A Community Survey in India

Patel, Vikram, Kirkwood, Betty R., Pednekar, Sulochana, Pereira, Bernadette, Barros, Preetam, Fernandes, Janice, Datta, Jane, Pai, Reshma, Weiss, Helen, Mabey, David·2006·Archives of General Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gender disadvantage and reproductive health are major determinants of women's health in developing countries. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of factors indicative of gender disadvantage and reproductive health with the risk of common mental disorders (CMDs) in women. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey from November 1, 2001, to June 15, 2003. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3000 women randomly selected from a sampling frame of women aged 18 to 45 years in Goa; 2494 women participated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the presence of a CMD, as defined by the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule. An interview and blood and vaginal/urine specimens were collected to ascertain risk factors. RESULTS: The prevalence of CMD was 6.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.7%-7.6%). Mixed anxiety-depressive disorder was the most common diagnosis (64.8%). Factors independently associated with the risk for CMD were factors indicative of gender disadvantage, particularly sexual violence by the husband (odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-4.6), being widowed or separated (OR, 5.4; 95% CI, 1.0-30.0), having low autonomy in decision making (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2), and having low levels of support from one's family (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4-3.3); reproductive health factors, particularly gynecological complaints such as vaginal discharge (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 2.2-4.8) and dyspareunia (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.4-4.6); and factors indicative of severe economic difficulties, such as hunger (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.6-4.6). There was no association between biological indicators (anemia and reproductive tract infections) and CMD. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical assessment of CMD in women must include exploration of violence and gender disadvantage. Gynecological symptoms may be somatic equivalents of CMD in women in Asian cultures.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archpsyc.63.4.404

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 287

Metadata

Authors
Patel, V., Kirkwood, B. R., Pednekar, S., Pereira, B., Barros, P., Fernandes, J., Datta, J., Pai, R., Weiss, H., & Mabey, D.
Venue
Archives of General Psychiatry
Published
2006-04-01
Volume
63
Issue
4
Pages
404
ISSN
0003-990X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2007616527
Cited by
287
References
5
FWCI
20.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gender Disadvantage and Reproductive Health Risk Factors for Common Mental Disorders in Women: A Community Survey in India. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archpsyc.63.4.404
The paper
Patel, V., Kirkwood, B. R., Pednekar, S., Pereira, B., Barros, P., Fernandes, J., Datta, J., Pai, R., Weiss, H., & Mabey, D. (2006). Gender Disadvantage and Reproductive Health Risk Factors for Common Mental Disorders in Women: A Community Survey in India. Archives of General Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.63.4.404

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.