How common are common mental disorders? Evidence that lifetime prevalence rates are doubled by prospective versus retrospective ascertainment.
How common are common mental disorders? Evidence that lifetime prevalence rates are doubled by prospective versus retrospective ascertainment.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1017/s0033291709991036
复制
发表时间：
2010-06
影响因子：
6.9
通讯作者：
Poulton, R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Moffitt, T. E.;Caspi, A.;Taylor, A.;Kokaua, J.;Milne, B. J.;Polanczyk, G.;Poulton, R.
大多数关于精神障碍终生患病率的信息来自回溯性调查，但由于回忆失败，这些调查低估了多少，目前尚不清楚。我们将前瞻性研究的结果与回顾研究的结果进行了比较。具有代表性的1972-1973年达尼丁新西兰出生队列(n=1037)被跟踪到32岁，保留率为96%，并与新西兰全国精神健康调查(NZMHS)和两项美国国家共病调查(NCS和NCS-R)进行了比较。衡量标准是18至32岁期间对焦虑、抑郁、酒精依赖和大麻依赖的研究诊断。与所有四种障碍类型的回顾数据相比，前瞻性研究中至32岁的终生障碍患病率大约翻了一番。此外，在疾病中，前瞻性测量得出过去一年与一生的平均比率为38%，而回顾测量得出过去一年与一生的平均比率较高，分别为57%(NZMHS，NCS-R)和65%(NCS)。前瞻性纵向研究通过提供有关终生患病率的独特信息来补充回溯性调查。在人群中，一生中至少有一次DSM定义的障碍的经历可能比之前认为的要普遍得多。研究应该问这对病因学理论、DSM方法的构建有效性、公众对污名的感知、对疾病负担的估计和公共卫生政策意味着什么。
Most information about the lifetime prevalence of mental disorders comes from retrospective surveys, but how much these surveys have undercounted due to recall failure is unknown. We compared results from a prospective study with those from retrospective studies. The representative 1972–1973 Dunedin New Zealand birth cohort (n=1037) was followed to age 32 years with 96% retention, and compared to the national New Zealand Mental Health Survey (NZMHS) and two US National Comorbidity Surveys (NCS and NCS-R). Measures were research diagnoses of anxiety, depression, alcohol dependence and cannabis dependence from ages 18 to 32 years. The prevalence of lifetime disorder to age 32 was approximately doubled in prospective as compared to retrospective data for all four disorder types. Moreover, across disorders, prospective measurement yielded a mean past-year-to-lifetime ratio of 38% whereas retrospective measurement yielded higher mean past-year-to-lifetime ratios of 57% (NZMHS, NCS-R) and 65% (NCS). Prospective longitudinal studies complement retrospective surveys by providing unique information about lifetime prevalence. The experience of at least one episode of DSM-defined disorder during a lifetime may be far more common in the population than previously thought. Research should ask what this means for etiological theory, construct validity of the DSM approach, public perception of stigma, estimates of the burden of disease and public health policy.