PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 17, 2024BMC Public Health4 citationsOpen Access

The epidemiology of major depression among adults in Norway: an observational study on the concurrence between population surveys and registry data – a NCDNOR project

View Full Paper
JBJørgen G. BramnessVHVidar HjellvikAHAnne Høye

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Abstract Background Mental health problems, and major depression in particular, are important public health issues. Following trends in the prevalence of major depression is difficult because of the costs and complications of diagnostic interviews and general population self-report health surveys. Scandinavian countries, however, have several central, population-based health registries. We aimed to investigate how well these registries capture the epidemiology of major depression in the population. Methods In two Norwegian regional surveys of general population health, each repeated after 10 years, responders were asked to report depressive symptoms using the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL) or the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Data were linked to three central health registries capturing contact with primary care, specialist care and prescriptions for antidepressants, to investigate how well these registries reflected self-reported depressive symptoms. Results Most responders scored low on Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), but 10% and 13%, respectively, scored above cut-off, with only minor changes between the two survey times. Females scored higher than males. Older people scored lower than younger, and a social gradient was visible. Around 12% of those who scored above the cut-off on either scale were recorded in the central health registries during the following year. This correlation was highest in primary care data, followed by prescription data and lowest in specialist care. Females were more often recorded in registries ( p < 0.001), as were younger people ( p < 0.001). Conclusions There was a strong association between scores on screening for major depression in the general population surveys and being recorded in central health registries. There was a low sensitivity of these registries. and there was some variation in how sensitive the central health registries were in picking up depression, especially for males and older people. However, the stability of the measures over time suggests we may get an impression of the prevalence of major depression in the general population by using data from the central health registries. A combination of primary care data, prescription data and specialist care data have a higher sensitivity.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bramness et al. (2024) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e699b9b6db6435876200f4https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18754-w
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Depression in relation to age and gender in the general population: the Nord‐Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT)2001 · 265 citations
  2. 2The seventh survey of the Tromsø Study (Tromsø7) 2015–2016: study design, data collection, attendance, and prevalence of risk factors and disease in a multipurpose population-based health survey2022 · 138 citations
  3. 3The Growing Burden of Major Depressive Disorders (MDD): Implications for Researchers and Policy Makers2021 · 196 citations
  4. 4Did NICE guidelines and the Quality Outcomes Framework change GP antidepressant prescribing in England? Observational study with time trend analyses 2003–20132015 · 71 citations
  5. 5Diagnosis of Depression and Use of Antidepressant Pharmacotherapy Among Adults in the United States2012 · 42 citations