Social Inequalities and the Distribution of the Common Mental Disorders

2004 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Social Inequalities ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
The Common

Social inequalities and the common mental disorders

2003 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 229-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Fryers ◽  
David Melzer ◽  
Rachel Jenkins
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Social Inequalities ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
The Common

Excess mortality of mental disorder

1998 ◽  
Vol 173 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Harris ◽  
Brian Barraclough
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
English Language ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Premature Death ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Standardised Mortality Ratios ◽  
The Common

BackgroundWe describe the increased risk of premature death from natural and from unnatural causes for the common mental disorders.MethodWith a Medline search (1966–1995) we found 152 English language reports on the mortality of mental disorder which met our inclusion criteria. From these reports, covering 27 mental disorder categories and eight treatment categories, we calculated standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all causes of death, all natural causes and all unnatural causes; and for most, SMRs for suicide, other violent causes and specific natural causes.ResultsHighest risks of premature death, from both natural and unnatural causes, are for substance abuse and eating disorders. Risk of death from unnatural causes is especially high for the functional disorders, particularly schizophrenia and major depression. Deaths from natural causes are markedly increased for organic mental disorders, mental retardation and epilepsy.ConclusionAll mental disorders have an increased risk of premature death.

scholarly journals Interaction between demand-control and social support in the occurrence of common mental disorders

2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amália Ivine Santana Mattos ◽  
Tânia Maria de Araújo ◽  
Maura Maria Guimarães de Almeida
Keyword(s):  
Social Support ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
High Demand ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
High Social Support ◽  
The Common ◽  
Demand Control

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To analyze the interaction between the psychosocial aspects of work and the occurrence of common mental disorders among health workers. METHODS This is a cross-sectional study conducted with a representative sample of workers of the primary health care of five municipalities of the State of Bahia, Brazil, in 2012. The variable of outcome were the common mental disorders evaluated by the SRQ-20, and the variables of exposure were high demand (high psychological demand and low control over the work) and low social support in the workplace. Interaction was checked by the deviation of the additivity of the effects for the factors studied from the calculation of excess risk from interaction, proportion of cases attributed to interaction, and the synergy index. RESULTS The global prevalence of common mental disorders was 21%. The group of combined exposure has shown higher magnitude (high demand and low social support), reaching 28% when compared to the 17% in the situation of no exposure (low demand and high social support). CONCLUSIONS The results strengthen the hypothesis of interaction between the factors investigated, directing to the synergy of the effects.

scholarly journals Socioeconomic inequalities in common mental disorders and psychotherapy treatment in the UK between 1991 and 2009

2013 ◽  
Vol 202 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Jokela ◽  
G. David Batty ◽  
Jussi Vahtera ◽  
Marko Elovainio ◽  
Mika Kivimäki
Keyword(s):  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Household Income ◽  
Social Inequalities ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Occupational Status ◽  
Income Quintile ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
The Uk

BackgroundInequality in health and treatment of disease across socioeconomic status groups is a major public health issue.AimsTo examine differences in socioeconomic status in common mental disorders and use of psychotherapy provided by the public and private sector in the UK between 1991 and 2009.MethodDuring these years, 28 054 men and women responded to annual surveys by the nationally representative, population-based British Household Panel Survey (on average 7 measurements per participant; 207 545 person-observations). In each year, common mental disorders were assessed with the self-reported 12-item General Health Questionnaire and socioeconomic status was assessed on the basis of household income, occupational status and education.ResultsHigher socioeconomic status was associated with lower odds of common mental disorder (highest v. lowest household income quintile odds ratio (OR) 0.88, 95% CI 0.82–0.94) and of being treated by publicly provided psychotherapy (OR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.34–0.55), but higher odds of being a client of private psychotherapy (OR = 3.33, 95% CI 2.36–4.71). The status difference in publicly provided psychotherapy treatment was more pronounced at the end of follow-up (OR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.23–0.56, in 2005–2009) than at the beginning of the follow-up period (OR =0.96, 95% CI 0.66–1.39, in 1991–1994; time interaction P<0.001). The findings for occupational status and education were similar to those for household income.ConclusionsThe use of publicly provided psychotherapy has improved between 1991 and 2009 among those with low socioeconomic status, although social inequalities in common mental disorders remain.

The Association Between Habitual Diet Quality and the Common Mental Disorders in Community-Dwelling Adults

2011 ◽  
Vol 73 (6) ◽  
pp. 483-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felice N. Jacka ◽  
Arnstein Mykletun ◽  
Michael Berk ◽  
Ingvar Bjelland ◽  
Grethe S. Tell
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Diet Quality ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Habitual Diet ◽  
The Common

scholarly journals Nosological profile and prevalence of common mental disorders of patients seen at the Family Health Program (FHP) units in Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro

2007 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Fortes ◽  
Luiz Augusto Brites Villano ◽  
Claudia S Lopes
Keyword(s):  
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Health Program ◽  
Stress Disorder ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Family Health ◽  
Dissociative Disorders ◽  
Somatoform Pain Disorder ◽  
Family Health Program ◽  
The Common

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to detect the prevalence of common mental disorders among patients seen by doctors at family health program units in Petrópolis-RJ, and to establish their nosological profile. METHOD: The population of the study included all 18 to 65-year-old patient who attended any family health program units included in the study during a 30-day period, between August and December 2002 (n = 714). The prevalence of common mental disorders was assessed using the General Health Questionnaire, 12 item version. In order to establish the nosological profile, the Composite International Diagnostic Interview was administered to all common mental disorders positive patients who accepted to return (n = 215). RESULTS: At the cut-off point of 2/3 the common mental disorders prevalence was 56% and for 4/5, it was 33%. The most frequent nosological categories found among common mental disorders positive patients were depression and anxiety categories along with posttraumatic stress disorder, somatoform pain disorder and dissociative disorders. There was a high frequency of comorbidity, especially between anxiety, depression, somatoform and dissociative disorders. CONCLUSIONS: The common mental disorders prevalence and the nosological profile found in FHP were similar to those of other primary care studies in Brazil, but some disorders (posttraumatic stress disorder, somatoform pain disorder and dissociative disorders) that had not been previously studied in this context were also very frequent. The high common mental disorders prevalence found reinforces the urgent need for systematic inclusion of this level of care in mental health assistance planning.

scholarly journals Molecular genetics in psychiatric epidemiology: the promise and challenge

1999 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 1265-1271 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. S. HENDERSON ◽  
D. H. R. BLACKWOOD
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Molecular Genetics ◽  
Common Mental Disorders ◽  
Economic Status ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Psychiatric Epidemiology ◽  
Adult Brain ◽  
Childhood Experiences ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Individual

Psychiatric epidemiology is becalmed. Since mid-century, there has been substantial progress in finding risk factors for the common mental disorders of anxiety and depression. This has been almost entirely within a social paradigm. Much has been learned about the effects of interpersonal and other social exposures across the lifespan in contributing to these disorders (Brown & Harris, 1978, 1989; Paykel, 1992; Blazer, 1995; Henderson, 1988, 1999). But the range of possibly causal variables has been narrow: demography, socio-economic status, childhood experiences, recent exposure to adversity and the availability of social support. The dominant paradigm has been environmental exposure, examining how experiences that arise outside the individual may have an enduring impact on mental health. The environment in question has been interpersonal or social. Within this paradigm, no new hypotheses of major significance have emerged in recent years.Epidemiologists have known that the biological domain might be important in aetiology, but for the common mental disorders it has been largely passed over. Properties of the adult brain, whether innate or moulded by environmental exposures, have only rarely been accessible. With the advances in molecular genetics, this is changing (Rutter & Plomin, 1997). For epidemiology, there is now the possibility of bringing molecular genetics into studies of aetiology. Because of the significance of this development, we present a critical assessment of the prospects for population-based research using molecular genetics, the work already reaching publication and the methodological issues that are arising.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document