Cited by 1,121Mental Health Treatment and AccessTreatment of Major DepressionPsychological Treatments and Disorders

Undertreatment of people with major depressive disorder in 21 countries

Open access
Thornicroft, Graham, Chatterji, Somnath, Evans-Lacko, Sara, Gruber, Michael, Sampson, Nancy, Aguilar-Gaxiola, Sergio, Al-Hamzawi, Ali, Alonso, Jordi +19 more·2017·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Aims: To examine the: (a) 12-month prevalence of DSM-IV MDD; (b) proportion aware that they have a problem needing treatment and who want care; (c) proportion of the latter receiving treatment; and (d) proportion of such treatment meeting minimal standards. Method: Representative community household surveys from 21 countries as part of the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys. Results: Of 51 547 respondents, 4.6% met 12-month criteria for DSM-IV MDD and of these 56.7% reported needing treatment. Among those who recognised their need for treatment, most (71.1%) made at least one visit to a service provider. Among those who received treatment, only 41.0% received treatment that met minimal standards. This resulted in only 16.5% of all individuals with 12-month MDD receiving minimally adequate treatment. Conclusions: Only a minority of participants with MDD received minimally adequate treatment: 1 in 5 people in high-income and 1 in 27 in low-/lower-middle-income countries. Scaling up care for MDD requires fundamental transformations in community education and outreach, supply of treatment and quality of services.

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.116.188078

Cites

35 of 35 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?

  • A much smaller proportion of people with mental health conditions access adequate care and support.

    “A much smaller proportion access adequate care and support.(1-3)”

    From The impact of digital interventions on help-seeking behaviour for mental health problems: a systematic literature review (2022) · cites this paper as [3]

    The Treatment adequacy section reports that only 16.5% of people with major depressive disorder received minimally adequate treatment. This supports the claim for depression, but the paper does not establish the same proportion for people with mental health conditions generally or for access to support beyond treatment. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Around 40-60% of people with mental health conditions perceive a need for treatment but are not able to access any care.

    “Around 40-60% of people with mental health conditions perceive a need for treatment but are not able to access any care.(1-3)”

    From The impact of digital interventions on help-seeking behaviour for mental health problems: a systematic literature review (2022) · cites this paper as [3]

    The ‘Obtaining treatment once need is recognised’ section reports that 71.1% of people with major depressive disorder who recognised a need for treatment visited a provider, leaving 28.9% who did not. The proportion without a visit is about 40–47% in the middle- and lower-income country groups, but the paper does not establish that they were unable to access care, and its findings do not cover all mental health conditions. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Only 16.5% of people diagnosed with depression across 21 countries received treatment; treatment rate in MENA was lower, at 7% in Lebanon and 2% in Iraq.

    “A study across 21 countries showed that only 16.5% of people diagnosed with depression received treatment; the treatment rate in countries from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region was even lower, at only 7% in Lebanon and 2% in Iraq (Thornicroft et al., 2017).”

    From An internet‐based cognitive behavioural intervention for adults with depression in Arabic‐speaking countries: A randomized controlled trial. (2024) · cites this paper as Thornicroft et al., 2017

    The Treatment adequacy section reports that 16.5% of people with 12-month major depressive disorder received *minimally adequate* treatment, not that only 16.5% received any treatment. Table 1 (p. 121) gives the corresponding figures as 7.0% for Lebanon and 2.5% for Iraq, rather than 2% for Iraq. The cited sentence omits the treatment-adequacy qualifier and slightly understates the Iraq figure. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Low-resource and middle-resource settings often have low rates of recognition and treatment of mental disorders and a paucity of data on the prevalence of mental disorders.

    “These settings often have low rates of recognition and treatment of mental disorders 50 and a paucity of data on the prevalence of mental disorders.”

    From The Lancet Psychiatry Commission on youth mental health (2024) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Recognition of need for treatment and Treatment adequacy sections report low recognition and treatment rates for major depressive disorder in low-/lower-middle-income countries. The cited paper studies MDD, not mental disorders generally. The citation appears before the separate clause about a paucity of prevalence data, so that clause is not attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The treatment gap for anxiety disorders is even higher than that described for major depressive disorder.

    “This finding is consistent with previous studies, and it suggests that the treatment gap for anxiety disorders is even higher than that described for MDD (Thornicroft et al., 2017).”

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: 2

  1. [21]21. First M, Spitzer R, Gibbon M, Williams J. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders, Research Version, Non-patient Edition (SCID-I/NP). Biometrics Research, New York State Psychiatric Institute, 2002.
  2. [27]27. American Psychiatric Association. Practice Guidelines for Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders: Compendium. American Psychiatric Association Press, 2006.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thornicroft, G., Chatterji, S., Evans-Lacko, S., Gruber, M., Sampson, N., Aguilar-Gaxiola, S., Al-Hamzawi, A., Alonso, J., Andrade, L., Borges, G., Bruffaerts, R., Bunting, B., de Almeida, J. M. C., Florescu, S., de Girolamo, G., Gureje, O., Haro, J. M., He, Y., Hinkov, H., Karam, E., Kawakami, N., Lee, S., Navarro-Mateu, F., Piazza, M., Posada-Villa, J., de Galvis, Y. T., & Kessler, R. C.
Affiliations
  • Universitat Pompeu Fabra (ES)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Ulster (GB)
  • University of Balamand (LB)
Corresponding author
Thornicroft, Graham
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2017-02
Volume
210
Issue
2
Pages
119-124
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2559328180
Cited by
1,121
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 119 · 2025: 127 · 2024: 130 · 2023: 170 · 2022: 139 · 2021: 136 · 2020: 134 · 2019: 88 · 2018: 54 · 2017: 22 · 2012: 1
FWCI
85.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion)
  • Repositori digital de la UPF (Universitat Pompeu Fabra) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (044708, Grant 044708)
  • John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation (R01 DA016558, R13-MH066849)
  • John W. Alden Trust (R01-MH069864, R13-MH066849)
  • Bristol-Myers Squibb
  • Eli Lilly and Company
  • Pfizer
  • AstraZeneca
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • Sanofi
  • World Health Organization (R03 TW006481)
  • South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
  • King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  • Government of the United Kingdom
  • Universidad CES
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (FP7/2007–2013, NF-SI-0611-10053, U01-MH60220)
  • King's College London
  • European Commission (EAHC 20081308, 20081308, 2007–2013, FP7 2007-2013, 1999-01042, QLG5–1999-01042, SANCO2004123, 2004123, FP7/2007)
  • Public Health Agency
  • Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (03/00204-3, 03/00204?)
  • Generalitat de Catalunya (01042, RETICS RD06/0011 REM-TAP, CB06/02/0046)
  • Bundesministerium für Gesundheit
  • National Insurance Institute of Israel (H13-SHOGAI-023, H16-KOKORO-013, H14-TOKUBETSU-026)
  • Ministerio de Salud de la Nación
  • Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (H16-KOKORO-013, H14-TOKUBETSU-026, H13-SHOGAI-023)
  • Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (307623/2013-0, 2013‐0)
  • Universidade de Lisboa
  • Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología (SAF 2000 158-CE)
  • Fundación para la Formación e Investigación Sanitarias de la Región de Murcia
  • Servicio Murciano de Salud
  • Regione Piemonte (00/0028)
  • Fakultet Medicinskih Nauka, Univerziteta U Kragujevcu
  • Servier
  • H. Lundbeck A/S
  • Fundação Champalimaud (R01 MH070884)
  • Ministerio de Salud
  • National Institutes of Health (5r13mh066849-04, 5r01mh069864-04, 5r01mh070884-05)
  • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (044708)
  • Pfizer Foundation (R01‐MH069864, R01-DA016558, R13-MH066849, R03-TW006481)
  • Pan American Health Organization (FIRCA R03-TW006481)
  • Executive Agency for Health and Consumers
  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
  • Instituto de Salud Carlos III (CB06/02/0046, CIBER CB06/02/0046, RETICS RD06/0011 REM-TAP, FP7/2007-2013, RETICS RD06/0011 REM-TAP, RETICS RD06/0011, RD06/0011, FIS 00/0028, CIBER CB06/02/0046)
  • Consejería de Sanidad y Política Social, Comunidad Autónoma de la Región de Murcia
  • Departament de Salut, Generalitat de Catalunya (CB06/02/0046, RETICS RD06/0011 REM-TAP)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R13-MH-066849, NIMH R01MH070884, R01‐MH070884, U01-MH-60220, MH60220, MH070884, MH069864, MH066849, U01MH060220, R01‐MH069864)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA016558, U01-MH60220)
  • Fogarty International Center (FIRCA R03TW006481, R03TW006481)
  • Cilag
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Disorders
Keywords
major depressive disorder, undertreatment, treatment seeking, help-seeking, treatment quality, prevalence, mental health services, low- and middle-income countries, global mental health, World Mental Health Surveys
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Mental Health Services, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Global Health, Prevalence, 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