Cross-national difference in the prevalence of depression caused by the diagnostic threshold
Abstract
Background According to published reports, the prevalence rates of major depressive disorder (MDD) in East-Asian countries are lower than in the West, but the reasons for this difference have not been fully investigated.Methods This study compared the Korean Epidemiologic Catchment Area study (KECAS) sample with the National Comorbidity Survey (NCS, USA) sample. In total, this study included 5349 participants in KECAS and 7423 in NCS aged 18-54 years. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) assessed for MDD. Analysis of the individual symptoms of MDD was completed.Results Diagnostic threshold of MDD was higher in KECAS participants than in NCS participants. Koreans diagnosed with MDD showed more work impairment than Americans with MDD. Koreans were more likely to express the symptoms like "low energy" and "concentration difficulty," but less to the symptoms like "depressed mood" and "thoughts of death" during an episode of MDD.Limitations The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) framework was the basis for the majority of the comparisons made in this study. Various depressive symptoms not included in the DSM framework were unlikely to be detected.Conclusions Cross-cultural differences in rates of MDD are attributable to diagnostic thresholds. Symptom patterns and forms of depression in Korea, as defined by the DSM framework, are not identical to those in the U.S.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Variations in reported prevalence figures could be caused by differences in the study period and in the measure of depression severity.
“Besides the differences in the population considered, variations in the figures reported could be caused by different factors, such as differences in the study period and in the measure of depression severity (Chang et al., 2008).”
From Prevalence and age patterns of depression in the United Kingdom. A population-based study (2021) · cites this paper as Chang et al., 2008
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 141
- Authors
- Chang, S. M., Hahm, B.-J., Lee, J.-Y., Shin, M. S., Jeon, H. J., Hong, J.-P., Lee, H. B., Lee, D.-W., & Cho, M. J.
- Affiliations
- Seoul National University Hospital (KR)
- Seoul National University (KR)
- Inje University (KR)
- Asan Medical Center (KR)
- Corresponding author
- Cho, Maeng Je
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Affective Disorders
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-02
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 159-167
- ISSN
- 0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2080132375
- Cited by
- 141
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 9.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Seoul National University Open Repository (Seoul National University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
- Keywords
- major depressive disorder, diagnostic thresholds, cross-cultural comparison, prevalence, National Comorbidity Survey, DSM diagnostic criteria, depressive symptoms, work impairment, symptom profiles
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Korea, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, United States, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Asian People
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