dc.contributor.author | Bramness, Jørgen Gustav | |
dc.contributor.author | Hjellvik, Vidar | |
dc.contributor.author | Høye, Anne | |
dc.contributor.author | Tesli, Martin Steen | |
dc.contributor.author | Haram, Marit | |
dc.contributor.author | Nystad, Wenche | |
dc.contributor.author | Krokstad, Steinar | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-09-26T08:49:40Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-09-26T08:49:40Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2024-05-17 | |
dc.description.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.<p>
<p>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.
<p>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).
<p>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. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Bramness, Hjellvik, Høye, Tesli, Haram, Nystad, Krokstad. The epidemiology of major depression among adults in Norway: an observational study on the concurrence between population surveys and registry data – a NCDNOR project. BMC Public Health. 2024;24(1) | |
dc.identifier.cristinID | FRIDAID 2272979 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1186/s12889-024-18754-w | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1471-2458 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10037/34877 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | BMC | en_US |
dc.relation.journal | BMC Public Health | |
dc.rights.holder | Copyright 2024 The Author(s) | en_US |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 | en_US |
dc.rights | Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) | en_US |
dc.title | The epidemiology of major depression among adults in Norway: an observational study on the concurrence between population surveys and registry data – a NCDNOR project | en_US |
dc.type.version | publishedVersion | en_US |
dc.type | Journal article | en_US |
dc.type | Tidsskriftartikkel | en_US |
dc.type | Peer reviewed | en_US |