Literature DB >> 30053765

[Prevalences of Depression Among Adults: Comparative Analysis of a Nationwide Survey and Routine Data].

Thomas G Grobe1, Katja Kleine-Budde1, Anke Bramesfeld1, Julia Thom2, Julia Bretschneider2, Ulfert Hapke2.   

Abstract

AIM: There are differences in the prevalence estimates of depressive disorders based on primary and secondary data. The reasons for this are, for instance, the use of divergent indicators and varying observation periods. This study examines the prevalence of depressive disorders using survey and routine data for a comparable survey period and age range. Effects of differences between data sources and indicators are estimated.
METHODS: For 2010, 3 indicators are compared: in a population survey collected a) self-reported medical diagnosis of depression, b) diagnosis of depressive disorders identified by clinical interviews and c) administrative depression diagnoses collected from routine data of a statutory health insurance. In sensitivity analyses, privately insured participants of the population survey were excluded, and insured persons with care needs were excluded from routine data. The definition of administrative depression diagnosis was varied depending on the frequency of coded diagnoses and the specificity of the diagnoses.
RESULTS: The highest prevalence (9.8%) was found for depression diagnoses from administrative data, the lowest prevalence (5.9%) in self-reported medical diagnoses of depression in the population survey. The prevalence of depression identified by clinical interviews was 8.4%. Differing age and gender-related courses of illness were found. The administrative prevalence dropped significantly if unspecific diagnoses (F3x.8, F3x.9) were excluded. DISCUSSION: Depending on the definition of depression diagnoses used in administrative data, there was a reduction in differences of prevalence compared to the self-reported medical diagnoses. Differences in prevalence based on a diagnosis of a depressive disorder identified in a clinical interview remained stable, which indicates different groups of persons. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30053765     DOI: 10.1055/a-0652-5424

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gesundheitswesen        ISSN: 0941-3790


  5 in total

1.  [Epidemic of depression? : Development of prevalence and help-seeking behaviour].

Authors:  Julia Nübel; Susanne Müllender; Ulfert Hapke; Frank Jacobi
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.214

2.  Mental health of the adult population in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rapid Review.

Authors:  Elvira Mauz; Sophie Eicher; Diana Peitz; Stephan Junker; Heike Hölling; Julia Thom
Journal:  J Health Monit       Date:  2022-02-03

3.  Well-being during COVID-19 pandemic: A comparison of individuals with minoritized sexual and gender identities and cis-heterosexual individuals.

Authors:  Pichit Buspavanich; Sonia Lech; Eva Lermer; Mirjam Fischer; Maximilian Berger; Theresa Vilsmaier; Till Kaltofen; Simon Keckstein; Sven Mahner; Joachim Behr; Christian J Thaler; Falk Batz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Perceived need for treatment and non-utilization of outpatient psychotherapy in old age: two cohorts of a nationwide survey.

Authors:  Paul Gellert; Sonia Lech; Eva-Marie Kessler; Wolfram Herrmann; Susanne Döpfmer; Klaus Balke; Monika Oedekoven; Adelheid Kuhlmey; Susanne Schnitzer
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 2.655

5.  Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (C-PHQ-9) in patients with psoriasis: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Xin Ye; Hui-Ling Shu; Xia Feng; Deng-Mei Xia; Zheng-Qun Wang; Wen-Yao Mi; Bei Yu; Xue-Li Zhang; Changqiang Li
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-13       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.