File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1016/S0165-0327(97)00136-5
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-0031912046
- PMID: 9476755
- WOS: WOS:000071687700018
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Does the method of data collection affect the reporting of depression in the relatives of depressed probands?
Title | Does the method of data collection affect the reporting of depression in the relatives of depressed probands? |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Family studies Genetics Major depression |
Issue Date | 1998 |
Publisher | Elsevier BV. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jad |
Citation | Journal Of Affective Disorders, 1998, v. 47 n. 1-3, p. 151-158 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Background: Data is usually collected from different sources in family studies in depression. We sought to determine what effect different methods of data collection had on the reporting of the lifetime prevalence of depression in the relatives of depressed probands. Method: We examined the psychiatric histories of 519 first-degree relatives of a consecutive series of 89 hospitalised depressed probands to ascertain their lifetime prevalence of RDC Major Depression. These data on relatives were obtained either directly with the SADS-L (n = 116), indirectly with the Family History RDC (FH-RDC) (n = 283) or by examining the casenotes of the probands (n = 120). Results: The method of data collection had a marked effect on the reported prevalence of depression, with direct interview being much more sensitive in detecting the less severe forms of the illness. The lifetime prevalence of hospitalised depression in relatives, however, was unaffected by the method of the data collection. Variation in lifetime prevalence of depression between the SADS-L and FH-RDC appeared to be due mainly to differences in the sensitivity of the instrumentation rather than to biases in sampling. Conclusion: We confirm that indirect sources of family information have reduced sensitivity for the detection of depression in relatives compared with direct interview. Limitations: The numbers of relatives directly interviewed were small and the probands represented a severely affected sample which limits the generalisability of the findings. Clinical relevance: Combining data from different methods of collection in family studies is therefore problematic unless a narrow definition of caseness is used (e.g. depression requiring hospitalisation). |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/175783 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 4.9 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.082 |
ISI Accession Number ID | |
References |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Duggan, C | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Sham, P | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Minne, C | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, A | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Murray, R | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2012-11-26T09:01:15Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2012-11-26T09:01:15Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 1998 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Journal Of Affective Disorders, 1998, v. 47 n. 1-3, p. 151-158 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0165-0327 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/175783 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Data is usually collected from different sources in family studies in depression. We sought to determine what effect different methods of data collection had on the reporting of the lifetime prevalence of depression in the relatives of depressed probands. Method: We examined the psychiatric histories of 519 first-degree relatives of a consecutive series of 89 hospitalised depressed probands to ascertain their lifetime prevalence of RDC Major Depression. These data on relatives were obtained either directly with the SADS-L (n = 116), indirectly with the Family History RDC (FH-RDC) (n = 283) or by examining the casenotes of the probands (n = 120). Results: The method of data collection had a marked effect on the reported prevalence of depression, with direct interview being much more sensitive in detecting the less severe forms of the illness. The lifetime prevalence of hospitalised depression in relatives, however, was unaffected by the method of the data collection. Variation in lifetime prevalence of depression between the SADS-L and FH-RDC appeared to be due mainly to differences in the sensitivity of the instrumentation rather than to biases in sampling. Conclusion: We confirm that indirect sources of family information have reduced sensitivity for the detection of depression in relatives compared with direct interview. Limitations: The numbers of relatives directly interviewed were small and the probands represented a severely affected sample which limits the generalisability of the findings. Clinical relevance: Combining data from different methods of collection in family studies is therefore problematic unless a narrow definition of caseness is used (e.g. depression requiring hospitalisation). | en_US |
dc.language | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | Elsevier BV. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jad | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Affective Disorders | en_US |
dc.subject | Family studies | - |
dc.subject | Genetics | - |
dc.subject | Major depression | - |
dc.subject.mesh | Bias (Epidemiology) | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Data Collection - Methods - Standards | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Depressive Disorder - Epidemiology - Genetics | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Family | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Female | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Follow-Up Studies | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Hospitalization | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Male | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Prevalence | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Psychiatric Status Rating Scales - Statistics & Numerical Data | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Risk Factors | en_US |
dc.subject.mesh | Sensitivity And Specificity | en_US |
dc.title | Does the method of data collection affect the reporting of depression in the relatives of depressed probands? | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.email | Sham, P: pcsham@hku.hk | en_US |
dc.identifier.authority | Sham, P=rp00459 | en_US |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/S0165-0327(97)00136-5 | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 9476755 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-0031912046 | en_US |
dc.relation.references | http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0031912046&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpage | en_US |
dc.identifier.volume | 47 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issue | 1-3 | en_US |
dc.identifier.spage | 151 | en_US |
dc.identifier.epage | 158 | en_US |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000071687700018 | - |
dc.publisher.place | Netherlands | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Duggan, C=7101812173 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Sham, P=34573429300 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Minne, C=55393727700 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Lee, A=19135120800 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Murray, R=35406239400 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0165-0327 | - |