Simulation studies of age-specific lifetime major depression prevalence

Scott B Patten, Lee Gordon-Brown, Graham Meadows, Scott B Patten, Lee Gordon-Brown, Graham Meadows

Abstract

Background: The lifetime prevalence (LTP) of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is the proportion of a population having met criteria for MDD during their life up to the time of assessment. Expectation holds that LTP should increase with age, but this has not usually been observed. Instead, LTP typically increases in the teenage years and twenties, stabilizes in adulthood and then begins to decline in middle age. Proposed explanations for this pattern include: a cohort effect (increasing incidence in more recent birth cohorts), recall failure and/or differential mortality. Declining age-specific incidence may also play a role.

Methods: We used a simulation model to explore patterns of incidence, recall and mortality in relation to the observed pattern of LTP. Lifetime prevalence estimates from the 2002 Canadian Community Health Survey, Mental Health and Wellbeing (CCHS 1.2) were used for model validation and calibration.

Results: Incidence rates predicting realistic values for LTP in the 15-24 year age group (where mortality is unlikely to substantially influence prevalence) lead to excessive LTP later in life, given reasonable assumptions about mortality and recall failure. This suggests that (in the absence of cohort effects) incidence rates decline with age. Differential mortality may make a contribution to the prevalence pattern, but only in older age categories. Cohort effects can explain the observed pattern, but only if recent birth cohorts have a much higher (approximately 10-fold greater) risk and if incidence has increased with successive birth cohorts over the past 60-70 years.

Conclusions: The pattern of lifetime prevalence observed in cross-sectional epidemiologic studies seems most plausibly explained by incidence that declines with age and where some respondents fail to recall past episodes. A cohort effect is not a necessary interpretation of the observed pattern of age-specific lifetime prevalence.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Lifetime prevalence of major depression in the Canadian Community Health Survey 1.2, Mental Health and Wellbeing (error bars represent 95% confidence intervals).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Layout for animations of model simulations.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Simulated age-specific LTP: constant incidence, no false negatives, no effect of depression on mortality. C = 0.01, r = 0, false negative rate = 0, MR = 1, error bars represent 95% CIs.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Simulated age-specific LTP: declining incidence with age, no false negatives, no effect of depression on mortality. C = 0.01, r = 0.05, false negative rate = 0, MR = 1, error bars represent 95% CIs
Figure 5
Figure 5
Simulated age-specific LTP: declining incidence with age, 15% false negatives after 5 years, no effect of depression on mortality. C = 0.01, r = 0.05, false negative rate 15% per 5 years, no effect of depression on mortality, error bars represent 95% CIs. One set of simulated values represents the actual lifetime prevalence, the other the apparent lifetime prevalence in which false negative results are not counted in the numerator of the prevalence proportion.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Simulated age-specific LTP: effect of mortality with incidence that declines with age. The dark line represents a strong effect of mortality (MR = 2.0) in the absence of false negative ratings and declining incidence: C = 0.01, r = 0, false negative rate = 0. The lighter line represents a more realistic effect of mortality (MR = 1.4) in the absence of false negative ratings and declining incidence: C = 0.01, r = 0, false negative rate = 0. The error bars represent 95% CIs.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Simulated age-specific LTP: effect of mortality with incidence that declines with age. The dark line depicts constant incidence C = 0.01 that declines with age (r = 0.05) and there are no false negative ratings. This is the same simulation depicted in Figure 4 and is presented here for comparison to the lighter line, which represents a simulation based on the same assumptions except that MR is 1.4.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Simulated age-specific LTP in women: model parameters optimized to CCHS 1.2 data. C = 0.13, r = 0.08, MR = 1.2, FNR = 0.10. These parameter values derive from multiple simulations seeking to minimize the sum or squares of differences between simulated and observed age and sex-specific LTP estimates. The r parameter represents a decline in incidence with age > 15 (an age effect).
Figure 9
Figure 9
Simulated age-specific LTP in men: model parameters optimized to CCHS 1.2 data. C = 0.15, r = 0.03, MR = 1.7, FNR = 0.23. These parameter values derive from multiple simulations seeking to minimize the sum or squares of differences between simulated and observed age and sex-specific LTP estimates. The r parameter represents a decline in incidence with age > 15 (an age effect). The simulation includes an adjustment that places the LTP at 5% at the low end of the age range (age 15).
Figure 10
Figure 10
Simulated and observed LTP in men and women and estimated actual LTP for men and women, with model constrained to a single value for the false negative rate. The false negative rate is constrained to a single value, which was optimized at 0.14 per five year period, or approximately 3% per year.
Figure 11
Figure 11
Contour plot depicting model fit at various combinations of the false negative rate and r parameter. The vertical axis is the sum of squared difference between observed age-specific LTP and simulated age-specific LTP. Lower elevation on the contour plot indicates a better concordance between observed and simulated age-specific LTP. The blue region at the lowest contour tracks diagonally across the plane at the base, indicating that higher r values provide a better fit when the false negative rate is low whereas lower r values provide a better fit when the false negative rate is higher.
Figure 12
Figure 12
Simulated age-specific LTP in women: model parameters optimized to CCHS 1.2 data under the assumption that incidence does not decline with age. C = 0.14, r = 0.08, MR = 1.7, FNR = 0.33. These parameter values derive from multiple simulations seeking to minimize the sum or squares of differences between simulated and observed age and sex-specific LTP estimates.
Figure 13
Figure 13
Simulated age-specific LTP in men: model parameters optimized to CCHS 1.2 data under the assumption that incidence does not decline with age. C = 0.14, r = 0.03, MR = 1.5, FNR = 0.40. These parameter values derive from multiple simulations seeking to minimize the sum or squares of differences between simulated and observed age and sex-specific LTP estimates. The r parameter represents a decline in incidence with age > 15 (an age effect).
Figure 14
Figure 14
Simulated age- and sex-specific LTP, by birth cohort in women. The light lines represent the projected age-specific LTP pattern experienced by the birth cohorts assuming no change in incidence with age (r = 0) and no false negative ratings. The MR is set at 1.4 in these simulations.
Figure 15
Figure 15
Simulated age- and sex-specific LTP, by birth cohort in men. The light lines represent the projected age-specific LTP pattern experienced by the birth cohorts assuming no change in incidence with age (r = 0) and no false negative ratings. The MR is set at 1.4 in these simulations.

References

    1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 3. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1980.
    1. Anthony JC, Folstein M, Romanoski AJ, Von Korff MR, Nestadt GR, Chahal R, Merchant A, Brown CH, Shapiro S, Kramer M, Gruenberg EM. Comparison of the lay diagnostic interview schedule and a standardized psychiatric diagnosis. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1985;42:667–675.
    1. Helzer JE, Spitznagel EL, McEvoy L. The predictive validity of lay diagnostic interview schedule diagnoses in the general population. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1987;44:1069–1077.
    1. Robins LN, Wing J, Wittchen HU, Helzer JE, Babor TF, Burke J, Farmer A, Jablenski A, Pickens R, Regier DA, Sartorius N, Towle LH. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview. An epidemiological instrument suitable for use in conjunction with different diagnostic systems and in different cultures. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1988;45:1069–1077.
    1. Wittchen HU, Robins LN, Cottler LB, Sartorius N, Burke JD, Regier D. participants in the multicentre WHO/ADAMHA field trial. Cross-cultural feasibility, reliability and sources of variance of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) Br J Psychiatry. 1991;159:645–653. doi: 10.1192/bjp.159.5.645.
    1. Kessler RC, Ustun TB. The World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative Version of the World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2004;13:83–121.
    1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) Washington: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.
    1. Gravel R, Béland Y. The Canadian Community Health Survey: Mental Health and Wellbeing. Can J Psychiatry. 2005;50:573–579.
    1. Andrews G, Anstey K, Brodaty H, Issakidis C, Luscombe G. Recall of depressive episode 25 years previously. Psychol Med. 1999;29:787–791. doi: 10.1017/S0033291799008648.
    1. Wulsin LR, Vaillant GE, Wells VE. A systematic review of the mortality of depression. Psychosom Med. 1999;61:6–17.
    1. Giuffra LA, Risch N. Diminished recall and the cohort effect of major depression: a simulation study. Psychol Med. 1994;24:375–383. doi: 10.1017/S0033291700027355.
    1. Lewinsohn PM, Hops h, Roberts RE, Seeley JR, Andrews JA. Adolescent psychopathology: I. Prevalence and incidence of depression and other DSM-III-R disorders in high school students. J Abn Psychol. 1993;102:133–144. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.102.1.133.
    1. Kruijshaar ME, Barendregt J, Vos T, de Graaf R, Spijker J, Andrews G. Lifetime prevalence estimates of major depression: An indirect estimation method and a quantification of recall bias. Eur J Epidemiol. 2005;20:103–111. doi: 10.1007/s10654-004-1009-0.
    1. Arena. Sewickley, PA, Rockwell Software Inc; 2006. [10]
    1. Statistics Canada. Deaths, by sex and age group, Canada, provinces and territories, annual (persons), 1971/1972 to 2007/2008. 051-0002. Ottawa, Statistics Canada; 2009.
    1. Patten SB. Major depression incidence in Canada. Can Med Assoc J. 2000;163:714–715.
    1. Beaudet MP. Psychological health - depression. Health Reports. 1999;11:63–75.
    1. Law AM. Simulation Modeling & Analysis. 4. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2007. Basic Simulation Modeling; pp. 1–90.
    1. Patten SB. Simulation of Age-specific Lifetime Prevalence of Major Depression. Calgary, DSpace at University of Calgary; 2009.
    1. Foley DL, Neale MC, Kendler KS. Reliability of a lifetime history of major depression: implications for heritability and co-morbidity. Psychol Med. 1998;28:4857–870. doi: 10.1017/S0033291798006977.
    1. Patten SB. Simulation of a Possible Major Depression Cohort Effect. Calgary, DSpace at the University of Calgary; 2009.
    1. Kessler RC, Üstün TB. The WHO World Mental Health Surveys. Global Perspectives on the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2008.
    1. Eaton WW, Kramer M, Anthony JC, Dryman A, Shapiro S, Locke BZ. The incidence of specific DIS/DSM-III mental disorders: data from the NIMH Epidemiological Catchment Area Program. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1989;79:163–178. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1989.tb08584.x.
    1. Bijl RV, de Graaf R, Ravelli A, Smit F, Vollebergh WA. Gender and age-specific first incidence of DSM-III-R psychiatric disorders in the general population. Results from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS) Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2002;37:372–379. doi: 10.1007/s00127-002-0566-3.
    1. Kessler RC, Walters EE. Epidemiology of DSM-III-R major depression and minor depression among adolescents and young adults in the National Comorbidity Survey. Depression and Anxiety. 2000;7:3–14. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6394(1998)7:1<3::AID-DA2>;2-F.
    1. Paradis AD, Reinherz HZ, Giaconia RM, Fitzmaurice G. Major depression in the transition to adulthood. The impact of active and past depression on young adult functioning. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2006;194:318–323. doi: 10.1097/01.nmd.0000217807.56978.5b.
    1. Parker G, Wilhelm K, Asghari A. Depressed mood states and their inter-relationship with clinical depression. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 1998;33:10–15. doi: 10.1007/s001270050015.
    1. Moffitt TE, Caspi A, Taylor A, Kokaua J, Milne BJ, Polanczyk G, Poulton R. How common are common mental disorders? Evidence that lifetime prevalence rates are doubled by prospective versus retrospective ascertainment. Psychol Med. 2009. pp. 1–11.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅