OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify possible subgroups of elders that varied in depressive symptomatology and to examine symptom patterns and health status differences between subgroups. METHODS: The Cache County memory study is a population-based epidemiological study of dementia with 5092 participants. Depressive symptoms were measured with a modified version of the diagnostic interview schedule-depression. There were 400 nondemented participants who endorsed currently (i.e., in the past 2 weeks) experiencing at least one of the three "gateway" depressive symptoms and then completed a full depression interview. Responses to all nine current depressive symptoms were modeled using the latent class analysis. RESULTS: Three depression subgroups were identified: a significantly depressed subgroup (62%), with the remainder split evenly between a subgroup with low probability of all symptoms (21%), and a subgroup with primarily psychomotor changes, sleep symptoms, and fatigue (17%). Latent class analysis derived subgroups of depressive symptoms and Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition depression diagnostic group were nonredundant. Age, gender, education, marital status, early or late onset, number of episodes, current episode duration, and functional status were not significant predictors of depression subgroup. The first subgroup was more likely to be recently bereaved and had less physical health problems, whereas the third subgroup were less likely to be using antidepressants compared with the second subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: There are distinct subgroups of depressed elders, which are not redundant with the Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition classification scheme, offering an alternative diagnostic approach to clinicians and researchers. Future work will examine whether these depressive symptom profiles are predictive of incident dementia and earlier mortality.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify possible subgroups of elders that varied in depressive symptomatology and to examine symptom patterns and health status differences between subgroups. METHODS: The Cache County memory study is a population-based epidemiological study of dementia with 5092 participants. Depressive symptoms were measured with a modified version of the diagnostic interview schedule-depression. There were 400 nondemented participants who endorsed currently (i.e., in the past 2 weeks) experiencing at least one of the three "gateway" depressive symptoms and then completed a full depression interview. Responses to all nine current depressive symptoms were modeled using the latent class analysis. RESULTS: Three depression subgroups were identified: a significantly depressed subgroup (62%), with the remainder split evenly between a subgroup with low probability of all symptoms (21%), and a subgroup with primarily psychomotor changes, sleep symptoms, and fatigue (17%). Latent class analysis derived subgroups of depressive symptoms and Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition depression diagnostic group were nonredundant. Age, gender, education, marital status, early or late onset, number of episodes, current episode duration, and functional status were not significant predictors of depression subgroup. The first subgroup was more likely to be recently bereaved and had less physical health problems, whereas the third subgroup were less likely to be using antidepressants compared with the second subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: There are distinct subgroups of depressed elders, which are not redundant with the Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition classification scheme, offering an alternative diagnostic approach to clinicians and researchers. Future work will examine whether these depressive symptom profiles are predictive of incident dementia and earlier mortality.
Authors: D C Steffens; I Skoog; M C Norton; A D Hart; J T Tschanz; B L Plassman; B W Wyse; K A Welsh-Bohmer; J C Breitner Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2000-06
Authors: B Richards; J Skoletsky; A P Shuber; R Balfour; R C Stern; H L Dorkin; R B Parad; D Witt; K W Klinger Journal: Hum Mol Genet Date: 1993-02 Impact factor: 6.150
Authors: A M Saunders; W J Strittmatter; D Schmechel; P H George-Hyslop; M A Pericak-Vance; S H Joo; B L Rosi; J F Gusella; D R Crapper-MacLachlan; M J Alberts Journal: Neurology Date: 1993-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Denise C R van Zelst; Eveline M Veltman; Didi Rhebergen; Paul Naarding; Almar A L Kok; Nathaly Rius Ottenheim; Erik J Giltay Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2022-09 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Lei Zhu; Adelita V Ranchor; Marije van der Lee; Bert Garssen; Robbert Sanderman; Maya J Schroevers Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-09-05 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Ana Catarino; Jonathan M Fawcett; Michael P Ewbank; Sarah Bateup; Ronan Cummins; Valentin Tablan; Andrew D Blackwell Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 7.723