Cited by 445Mental Health Treatment and AccessSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesTreatment of Major Depression

Changes in the prevalence of major depression and comorbid substance use disorders in the United States between 1991-1992 and 2001-2002

Compton, Wilson M., Conway, Kevin P., Stinson, Frederick S., Grant, Bridget F.·2006·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The authors examined changes in the prevalence of major depression in the United States between 1991-1992 and 2001-2002 and sought to determine whether changes in depression rates were associated with changes in rates of comorbid substance use disorder. METHOD: Data were drawn from two large (Ns exceeding 42,000) cross-sectional surveys of representative samples of the U.S. population conducted 10 years apart. Both surveys used face-to-face interviews, the same diagnostic criteria, and consistent assessment instruments. Rates of past-year major depressive episode in the total samples and among subjects with and without co-occurring substance use disorders in major demographic groups were compared. RESULTS: From 1991-1992 to 2001-2002, the prevalence of major depression among U.S. adults increased from 3.33% to 7.06%. Increases were statistically significant for whites, blacks, and Hispanics and for all age groups. For Hispanic men overall and Hispanic women 18-29 years of age, rates increased but not significantly. The hypothesis that increases in the rates of depression could be explained by concomitant increases in co-occurring substance use disorders was supported only for black men 18-29 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of major depression rose markedly over the past decade in the United States, and increases were noted for most sociodemographic subgroups of the population. If the prevalence continues to increase at the rate it did during the past decade, the demand for services will increase dramatically in the coming years.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/ajp.2006.163.12.2141

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 32 · Cited by 445

Authors
Compton, W. M., Conway, K. P., Stinson, F. S., & Grant, B. F.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2006-12
Volume
163
Issue
12
Pages
2141-2147
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2083453232
Cited by
445
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 28
FWCI
24.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
major depressive disorder, substance use disorders, comorbidities, prevalence trends, temporal trends, sociodemographic differences, racial and ethnic differences, age differences, Hispanic adults, Black men, mental health demand
MeSH terms
Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Ethnicity, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Male, United States, Comorbidity, Prevalence, Diagnosis, Dual (Psychiatry), Substance-Related Disorders

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