Cited by 254Mental Health Treatment and AccessTreatment of Major DepressionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Determinants of poor 1-year outcome of DSM-III-R major depression in the general population: results of the Netherlands mental health survey and incidence study (NEMESIS)

Spijker, J., Bijl, R. V., De Graaf, R., Nolen, W. A.·2001·Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate risk factors of poor 1-year outcome of major depression in the general population and to compare the results with data from clinical populations. METHOD: Psychiatric diagnoses were determined in a representative sample (N = 7,076) of the Dutch general population, using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) at baseline and 12 months later. A broad range of potential risk factors were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the depressed people at baseline, 28.3% were depressed 12 months later. Younger age, severity of depression, longer duration of previous episodes, the presence of anhedonia and early awakening, external locus of control and multiple negative life events appear to be risk factors. CONCLUSION: Poor outcome of major depression is frequent in the general population. Largely the same risk factors are involved as in clinical populations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1034/j.1600-0447.2001.103002122.x

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • Anhedonia is a negative prognostic factor for treatment outcome in adolescents and adults.

    “Furthermore, it was shown that anhedonia is a negative prognostic factor for treatment outcome both in adolescents (McMakin et al., 2012) and adults (Spijker et al., 2001; Vrieze et al., 2014).”

    From Circuit Mechanisms of Reward, Anhedonia, and Depression (2019) · cites this paper as Spijker et al., 2001

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spijker, J., Bijl, R. V., De Graaf, R., & Nolen, W. A.
Affiliations
  • Mental Health Ireland (IE)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
Corresponding author
Spijker, J.
Venue
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-02
Volume
103
Issue
2
Pages
122-130
ISSN
  • 0001-690X (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0447
OpenAlex
W2093073145
Cited by
254
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
FWCI
7.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
major depressive disorder, DSM-III-R, poor outcome, risk factors, relapse, general population, anhedonia, early morning awakening, locus of control, negative life events, depression severity, episode duration, age
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Internal-External Control, Life Change Events, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Personality Disorders, Population Surveillance, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Recurrence, Risk Factors, Severity of Illness Index, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome

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