Cited by 40Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

A multifactorial developmental model for the etiology of Major Depression in a population-based sample

Sjöholm, Louise, Lavebratt, Catharina, Forsell, Yvonne·2009·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background Kendler et al. proposed gender specific developmental models for Major Depression (MD) using a population-based sample of north-American adult twins. The aim of this study was to test whether any of the models could predict both MD and other depressive disorders among unrelated Swedes of both sexes. To test depression specific prediction the sample was overrepresented for other psychiatric diagnoses. Methods Persons with and without psychiatric symptoms were randomly selected from a population-based questionnaire study and interviewed by psychiatrists. Diagnoses were made according to DSM-IV. The study included 81 persons with MD, 132 persons with other depressive disorders, 136 persons with other psychiatric diagnoses and 744 persons without diagnosis. Path and correlation analyses were performed using 16 risk factors. Results The path analysis revealed similar prediction values of MD for the female and male models, i.e. two-thirds of the variance in liability to MD and depression in general when controls consisted of persons without psychiatric diagnosis. Prediction of depression was only slightly weakened when distinguishing cases from those with other psychiatric diagnoses. The risk factors with the strongest unique influence on depression were from early adolescence: neuroticism, low self-esteem, anxiety; from late adolescence: trauma; and history of depression. Limitations Possibly some limited recall bias. Conclusions The model was successfully replicated in…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2008.04.028

Cites

22 of 22 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

1 of the 23 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sjöholm, L., Lavebratt, C., & Forsell, Y.
Affiliations
Karolinska Institutet (SE)
Corresponding author
Sjöholm, Louise
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-02
Volume
113
Issue
1-2
Pages
66-76
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2105406301
Cited by
40
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
major depressive disorder, etiology of depression, developmental model, gender differences, risk factors, neuroticism, self-esteem, anxiety, trauma, history of depression, adolescence, depressive disorders, population-based sample, Swedes
MeSH terms
Adult, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Life Change Events, Male, Middle Aged, Population Surveillance, Risk Factors, Self Concept, Switzerland, Prevalence, 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