CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 522Mental Health Treatment and AccessBipolar Disorder and TreatmentTreatment of Major Depression

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 83 of the 83 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence and Incidence Studies of Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Open access
Waraich, Paul, Goldner, Elliot M, Somers, Julian M, Hsu, Lorena·2004·The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry
DOI 10.1177/070674370404900208
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This is the second in a series of papers that present systematic reviews of the prevalence and incidence of psychiatric disorders drawn from studies published in English literature in the years 1980 to 2000. The series discusses the implications of these epidemiologic findings to mental health policy and practice. Objective: To present the results of a systematic review of literature published between January 1, 1980, and December 31, 2000, that reports findings on the prevalence and incidence of mood disorders in both general population and primary care settings. Method: We conducted a literature search of epidemiologic studies of mood disorders, using Medline and HealthSTAR databases and canvassing English-language publications. Eligible publications were restricted to studies that examined subjects aged at least 15 years and over. We used a set of predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify relevant studies. We extracted and analyzed prevalence and incidence data for heterogeneity. Results: Of general population studies, a total of 18 prevalence and 5 incidence studies met eligibility criteria. We found heterogeneity across 1-year and lifetime prevalence of major depressive disorder (MDD), dysthymic disorder, and bipolar I disorder. The corresponding pooled rates for 1-year prevalence were 4.1 per 100, 2.0 per 100, and 0.72 per 100, respectively. For lifetime prevalence, the corresponding pooled rates were 6.7 per 100, 3.6 per 100, and 0.8 per 100, respectively. Significant variation was observed among 1-year incidence rates of MDD, with a corresponding pooled rate of 2.9 per 100. Conclusions: The prevalence of mood disorders reported in high-quality studies is generally lower than rates commonly reported in the general psychiatric literature. When controlled for common methodological confounds, variation in prevalence rates persists across studies and deserves continued study. Methodological variation among studies that have examined the prevalence of depression in primary health care services is so large that comparative analyses cannot be achieved.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/070674370404900208

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 83 references

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. World Health Organization, 1992, International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. 10th rev
  2. Lemelin J, 1994, Why do we miss the diagnosis? Can Fam Physician, 40, 104
  3. Murray CJL, 1996, The global burden of disease
  4. Eddy DM, 1992, Meta-analysis by the confidence interval method. The statistical synthesis of evidence
  5. Bourdon KH, 1992, Public Health Reports, 107, 663
  6. Morosini PL, 1992, Annali dell Istituto Superiore di Sanita, 28, 547
  7. 10.1177/000486748902300319 · DOI
  8. Patten SB, 2000, CMAJ, 163, 714
  9. Wacker HR, 1992, Int J Methods Psychiatr Res, 2, 91
  10. 10.1177/000486748902300318 · DOI
  11. Shen Y, 1981, Chin Med J, 94, 153
  12. Zung WWK, 1983, J Clin Psychiatry, 44, 365
  13. Rowe MG, 1995, J Fam Pract, 41, 551
  14. Zung WWK, 1983, J Clin Psychiatry, 44, 3
  15. Ornstein S, 2000, J Fam Pract, 49, 68

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–522 of 522

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Waraich, P., Goldner, E. M., Somers, J. M., & Hsu, L.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Waraich, Paul
ORCID
Somers, Julian M
Venue
The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2004-02
Volume
49
Issue
2
Pages
124-138
ISSN
  • 0706-7437 (ISSN-L)
  • 1497-0015
DOI
10.1177/070674370404900208
OpenAlex
W4237251694
Cited by
522
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 29
FWCI
1.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Health, British Columbia
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
mood disorders, prevalence, incidence, major depressive disorder, dysthymia, bipolar I disorder, primary care, lifetime prevalence, methodological heterogeneity
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Bipolar Disorder, Cross-Sectional Studies, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Humans, Incidence, Dysthymic Disorder, Mood 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