Cited by 324Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentMental Health Treatment and AccessMental Health Research Topics

Cumulative prevalence of psychiatric disorders by young adulthood: A prospective cohort analysis from the Great Smoky Mountains Study

Open access
Copeland, William, Shanahan, Lilly, Costello, E. Jane, Angold, Adrian·2011·Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective No longitudinal studies beginning in childhood have estimated the cumulative prevalence of psychiatric illness from childhood into young adulthood. The objective of this study was to estimate the cumulative prevalence of psychiatric disorders by young adulthood and to assess how inclusion of not otherwise specified diagnoses affects cumulative prevalence estimates.Method The prospective, population-based Great Smoky Mountains Study assessed 1,420 participants up to nine times from 9 through 21 years of age from 11 counties in the southeastern United States. Common psychiatric disorders were assessed in childhood and adolescence (ages 9 to 16 years) with the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Assessment and in young adulthood (ages 19 and 21 years) with the Young Adult Psychiatric Assessment. Cumulative prevalence estimates were derived from multiple imputed datasets.Results By 21 years of age, 61.1% of participants had met criteria for a well-specified psychiatric disorder. An additional 21.4% had met criteria for a not otherwise specified disorder only, increasing the total cumulative prevalence for any disorder to 82.5%. Male subjects had higher rates of substance and disruptive behavior disorders compared with female subjects; therefore, they were more likely to meet criteria for a well-specified disorder (67.8% vs 56.7%) or any disorder (89.1% vs 77.8%). Children with a not otherwise specified disorder only were at increased risk for a well-specified young adult disorder compared with children with no disorder in childhood.Conclusions Only a small percentage of young people meet criteria for a DSM disorder at any given time, but most do by young adulthood. As with other medical illness, psychiatric illness is a nearly universal experience.

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 · 10.1016/j.jaac.2010.12.014

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Diagnosis of generalized anxiety or major depression increases the risk of receiving the other diagnosis in the future.

    “For example, diagnosis of generalized anxiety or major depression increases the risk of receiving the other diagnosis in the future (10–12).”

    From Methods and challenges for assessing heterogeneity (2020) · cites this paper as [11]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [24]Costello EJ Angold A Burns BJ The Great Smoky Mountains Study of Youth: Goals, designs, methods, and the prevalence of DSM-III-R disorders Archives of General Psychiatry 1996 53 1129 1136 8956679

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Copeland, W., Shanahan, L., Costello, E. J., & Angold, A.
Affiliations
  • Duke University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Greensboro (US)
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Copeland, William
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-03
Volume
50
Issue
3
Pages
252-261
ISSN
0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2024040583
Cited by
324
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 14
FWCI
23.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression (MH63970, MH48085, MH63671, DA/MH11301)
  • University of North Carolina at Greensboro
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH-63671, R01MH063970, R01MH048085, DA/MH11301, MH-63970, MH-48085, K23MH080230, R01MH063671)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA/MH11301, R01DA011301)
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
cumulative prevalence, mental illness, early adulthood, childhood and adolescence, substance use disorders, disruptive behavior disorders, sex differences, Great Smoky Mountains Study, longitudinal cohort
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Mental Disorders, Child, Community Mental Health Services, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Risk Factors, Sex Factors, Southeastern United States, Cohort Studies, Prevalence, Age of Onset, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Young Adult

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