CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Aging, Health, and DisabilityHealth and Well-being StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Life adversity in depressed and non-depressed older adults: A cross-sectional comparison of the brief LTE-Q questionnaire and life events and difficulties interview as part of the CASPER study

Donoghue, Hjördis M., Traviss-Turner, Gemma D., House, Allan O., Lewis, Helen, Gilbody, Simon·2016·Journal of Affective Disorders
DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2015.12.070
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background There is a paucity of research on the nature of life adversity in depressed and non-depressed older adults. Early life events work used in-depth interviews; however, larger epidemiological trials investigate life adversity using brief questionnaires. This study investigates the type of life adversity experienced in later life and its association with depression and compares adversity captured using a brief (LTE-Q) and in-depth (LEDS) measure.Methods 960 participants over 65 years were recruited in UK primary care to complete the PHQ-9 and LTE-Q. A sub-sample (n=19) completed the LEDS and a question exploring the subjective experience of the LTE-Q and LEDS.Results Important life adversity was reported on the LTE-Q in 48% of the sample. In the LTE-Q sample the prevalence of depression (PHQ-9≥10) was 12%. Exposure to recent adversity was associated with doubling of the odds of depression. The LTE-Q only captured a proportion of adversity measured by the LEDS (42% vs 84%). Both measures showed health, bereavement and relationship events were most common.Limitations The cross-sectional design limits the extent to which inferences can be drawn around the direction of causality between adversity and depression. Recall in older adults is questionable.Conclusions UK older adults face adversity in areas of health, bereavement and relationships which are associated with depression. This has clinical relevance for psychological interventions for older adults to consider social context and social support. It helps identify the strengths and weaknesses of a brief adversity measure in large scale research. Further research is needed to explore the mechanisms of onset and direction of causality.

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.jad.2015.12.070

Cites

26 of 26 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?

  • Befriending alone is unlikely to achieve lasting effect, and the practitioner delivering the intervention needs to consider social context and social support.

    “Thus, befriending alone is unlikely to achieve lasting effect, and the practitioner delivering the intervention needs to consider social context and social support [33].”

    From Can support workers from AgeUK deliver an intervention to support older people with anxiety and depression? A qualitative evaluation (2019) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Implications section (p. 14) says psychological interventions for older adults should consider social context and social support. It does not assess befriending or say that befriending alone is unlikely to have a lasting effect. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Donoghue, H. M., Traviss-Turner, G. D., House, A. O., Lewis, H., & Gilbody, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • University of York (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-03
Volume
193
Pages
31-38
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jad.2015.12.070
OpenAlex
W2207358546
Cited by
20
References
26
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
4.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
CASPER / Plus study
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Health and Well-being Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
life adversity, depression, older adults, bereavement, relationship problems, health events, questionnaire validity, social support
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Life Change Events, Male, Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Prevalence

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