Cited by 77Agriculture and Farm SafetyMental Health Treatment and AccessSuicide and Self-Harm Studies

Mental health of British farmers

Open access
Thomas, H V, Lewis, G, Thomas, D Rh, Salmon, R L, Chalmers, R M, Coleman, T J, Kench, S M, Morgan-Capner, P +3 more·2003·Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Abstract

Aims:To estimate the prevalence of neurotic symptoms in a sample of British farmers, to investigate whether farming characteristics are associated with psychiatric morbidity, and to test the hypothesis that British farmers have a higher prevalence of depression and thoughts of life not worth living than the British household population. Methods:A total of 425 farmers from Hereford, Norwich, and Preston completed the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule (CIS-R) by computer between March and July 1999. The comparison cohort consisted of 9830 private householders aged 16–64 from the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys National Psychiatric Morbidity Surveys of Great Britain carried out in 1993 in which the CIS-R was administered. All analyses used the commands developed specifically for survey data available in Stata version 6.0. Results:Taking a threshold of an overall score of 12 or more on the CIS-R, only 6% of farmers reported clinically relevant psychiatric morbidity. Psychiatric morbidity was not significantly associated with farm type or size in this study. Farmers reported a lower prevalence of psychiatric morbidity than the general population but were more likely to report thinking that life is not worth living, particularly after the low prevalence of psychiatric morbidity had been taken into account (odds ratio 2.56, 95% CI 1.39 to 4.69). When restricting the comparison to only rural or semirural householders, this increased risk was even more pronounced (odds ratio 3.26, 95% CI 1.51 to 7.02). Conclusions:The relation between depression and suicidal ideation seems to be quite different among farmers and the general population and warrants further investigation. We have shown it is possible to measure mental health systematically in a sample of British farmers. This study should be repeated in the aftermath of the foot and mouth crisis.

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 · 10.1136/oem.60.3.181

Cites

13 of 13 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?

  • Symptoms of depression in farmers are associated with a 13% increase in sex-adjusted and age-adjusted mortality.

    “symptoms of depression are associated with a 13% increase in sex-adjusted and age-adjusted mortality [4–7].”

    From Improving the mental health of farmers: what types of remote support are acceptable, feasible, and improve outcomes? A feasibility RCT (2024) · cites this paper as [4]

    The Associations between psychiatric morbidity and farming characteristics section reports age- and sex-adjusted comparisons of depressive symptoms and suicidal thoughts, not mortality. A search for the claimed 13% increase and for depression-related mortality found no passage in our copy supporting that association. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Eisner CS, Neal RD, Scaife B. Depression and anxiety in farmers. Prim Care Psychiatry 1998;4:101-5.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thomas, H. V., Lewis, G., Thomas, D. R., Salmon, R. L., Chalmers, R. M., Coleman, T. J., Kench, S. M., Morgan-Capner, P., Meadows, D., Sillis, M., & Softley, P.
Affiliations
  • Cardiff University (GB)
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • Public Health Wales (GB)
  • Singleton Hospital (GB)
  • County Hospital (GB)
  • Chorley and South Ribble Hospital (GB)
  • Royal Preston Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Thomas, H V
Venue
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2003-03
Volume
60
Issue
3
Pages
181-186
ISSN
  • 0007-1072 (ISSN-L)
  • 1351-0711
  • 1470-7926
OpenAlex
W1931024319
Cited by
77
References
13
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Occupational and Environmental Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Health and Safety Executive
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Agriculture and Farm Safety
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
Keywords
farmers, mental health, psychiatric morbidity, depression, suicidal ideation, neurotic symptoms, farm type, farm size, rural population, foot-and-mouth disease
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Agricultural Workers' Diseases, Mental Disorders, Depression, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Diseases, Risk, Suicide, Prevalence, Odds Ratio

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