Cited by 168Mental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPrimary Care and Health Outcomes

Recent trends in the incidence of recorded depression in primary care

Open access
Rait, Greta, Walters, Kate, Griffin, Mark, Buszewicz, Marta, Petersen, Irene, Nazareth, Irwin·2009·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: There is a paucity of data describing how general practitioners (GPs) label or record depression. Aims: To determine incidence and sociodemographic variation in GP-recorded depression diagnoses and depressive symptoms. Method: Annual incidence rates calculated using data from 298 UK general practices between 1996 and 2006, adjusted for year of diagnosis, gender, age and deprivation. Results: Incidence of diagnosed depression fell from 22.5 to 14.0 per 1000 person-years at risk (PYAR) from 1996 to 2006. The incidence of depressive symptoms rose threefold from 5.1 to 15.5 per 1000 PYAR. Combined incidence of diagnoses and symptoms remained stable. Diagnosed depression and symptoms were more common in women and in more deprived areas. Conclusions: Depression recorded by general practitioners has lower incidence rates than depression recorded in epidemiological studies, although there are similar associations with gender and deprivation. General practitioners increasingly use symptoms rather than diagnostic labels to categorise people's illnesses. Studies using standardised diagnostic instruments may not be easily comparable with clinical practice.

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 · 10.1192/bjp.bp.108.058636

Cites

37 of 37 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

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

2 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [31]31. Ornstein S, Stuart G, Jenkins R. Depression diagnoses and antidepressant use in primary care practices. J Fam Pract 2000; 49: 68-72.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rait, G., Walters, K., Griffin, M., Buszewicz, M., Petersen, I., & Nazareth, I.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Rait, Greta
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2009-12
Volume
195
Issue
6
Pages
520-524
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2006000121
Cited by
168
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 13
FWCI
14.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University College London
  • Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
Keywords
depression, depressive symptoms, incidence, general practitioners, primary care, sociodemographic variation, gender differences, socioeconomic deprivation, clinical practice
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Depressive Disorder, Family Practice, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Medical Records, Middle Aged, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Socioeconomic Factors, Incidence, Age Distribution, Young Adult

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