CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 87Mental Health Treatment and AccessSurvey Methodology and NonresponseMental Health Research Topics

Reevaluation of Secular Trends in Depression Rates

Simon, Gregory E., VonKorff, Michael·1992·American Journal of Epidemiology
DOI 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116252
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Results of numerous community surveys of psychiatric illness suggest a striking change in the occurrence of depression, with younger generations experiencing higher lifetime risk and earlier age of onset. Data from the National Institute of Mental Health Epidemiologic Catchment Area Survey (a cross-sectional survey of psychiatric morbidity in five US communities conducted between 1980 and 1984) were reexamined for evidence of methods effects which might contribute to these unexpected findings. A pattern of higher lifetime risk and earlier age of onset among recent birth cohorts was observed for every psychiatric disorder examined, with schizophrenia, major depression, and panic disorder showing equally strong trends. For respondents of all ages, reported first onset of major depression clustered in the 10-year period prior to the study interview, in contrast to the expectation that older respondents would report onset in early adulthood. Examination of individual psychiatric symptoms revealed a nearly universal pattern of decreasing lifetime prevalence among older respondents, a reversal of the expected accumulation of lifetime symptoms with age. These findings suggest that effects of study methods may contribute to the apparent temporal trends in prevalence of depression and that cross-sectional surveys may underestimate lifetime psychiatric morbidity among older respondents. Generational changes in the lifetime risk of depression or other psychiatric disorders may not be reliably assessed by cross-sectional survey data.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116252

Cites

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?

  • Increased prevalence of disrupted circadian rhythms strongly correlates with the increased incidence of mood disorders.

    “increased prevalence of disrupted circadian rhythms strongly correlates with the increased incidence of mood disorders9,24–26.”

    From Circadian rhythm disruption and mental health (2020) · cites this paper as [24]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Simon, G. E., & VonKorff, M.
Affiliations
Group Health Cooperative (US)
Corresponding author
Simon, Gregory E.
ORCID
Simon, Gregory E.
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
1992-06-15
Volume
135
Issue
12
Pages
1411-1422
ISSN
  • 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-6256
DOI
10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116252
OpenAlex
W2338771016
Cited by
87
References
0
Citations by year
2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
11.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
depression, secular trends, lifetime prevalence, age of onset, birth cohort, psychiatric morbidity, schizophrenia, panic disorder, major depressive disorder, older adults, psychiatric symptoms
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Mental Disorders, Child, Child, Preschool, Depressive Disorder, Humans, Middle Aged, United States, 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