BackgroundUnderstanding the prevalence of schizophrenia has important implications for both health service planning and risk factor epidemiology. The aims of this review are to systematically identify and collate studies describing the prevalence of schizophrenia, to summarize the findings of these studies, and to explore selected factors that may influence prevalence estimates.Methods and FindingsStudies with original data related to the prevalence of schizophrenia (published 1965–2002) were identified via searching electronic databases, reviewing citations, and writing to authors. These studies were divided into “core” studies, “migrant” studies, and studies based on “other special groups.” Between- and within-study filters were applied in order to identify discrete prevalence estimates. Cumulative plots of prevalence estimates were made and the distributions described when the underlying estimates were sorted according to prevalence type (point, period, lifetime, and lifetime morbid risk). Based on combined prevalence estimates, the influence of selected key variables was examined (sex, urbanicity, migrant status, country economic index, and study quality).A total of 1,721 prevalence estimates from 188 studies were identified. These estimates were drawn from 46 countries, and were based on an estimated 154,140 potentially overlapping prevalent cases. We identified 132 core studies, 15 migrant studies, and 41 studies based on other special groups. The median values per 1,000 persons (10%–90% quantiles) for the distributions for point, period, lifetime, and lifetime morbid risk were 4.6 (1.9–10.0), 3.3 (1.3–8.2), 4.0 (1.6–12.1), and 7.2 (3.1–27.1), respectively. Based on combined prevalence estimates, we found no significant difference (a) between males and females, or (b) between urban, rural, and mixed sites. The prevalence of schizophrenia in migrants was higher compared to native-born individuals: the migrant-to-native-born ratio median (10%–90% quantile) was 1.8 (0.9–6.4). When sites were grouped by economic status, prevalence estimates from “least developed” countries were significantly lower than those from both “emerging” and “developed” sites (p = 0.04). Studies that scored higher on a quality score had significantly higher prevalence estimates (p = 0.02).ConclusionsThere is a wealth of data about the prevalence of schizophrenia. These gradients, and the variability found in prevalence estimate distributions, can provide direction for future hypothesis-driven research.
Recent systematic reviews have encouraged the psychiatric research community to reevaluate the contours of schizophrenia epidemiology. This paper provides a concise overview of three related systematic reviews on the incidence, prevalence, and mortality associated with schizophrenia. The reviews shared key methodological features regarding search strategies, analysis of the distribution of the frequency estimates, and exploration of the influence of key variables (sex, migrant status, urbanicity, secular trend, economic status, and latitude). Contrary to previous interpretations, the incidence of schizophrenia shows prominent variation between sites. The median incidence of schizophrenia was 15.2/100,000 persons, and the central 80% of estimates varied over a fivefold range (7.7-43.0/100,000). The rate ratio for males:females was 1.4:1. Prevalence estimates also show prominent variation. The median lifetime morbid risk for schizophrenia was 7.2/1,000 persons. On the basis of the standardized mortality ratio, people with schizophrenia have a two- to threefold increased risk of dying (median standardized mortality ratio = 2.6 for all-cause mortality), and this differential gap in mortality has increased over recent decades. Compared with native-born individuals, migrants have an increased incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia. Exposures related to urbanicity, economic status, and latitude are also associated with various frequency measures. In conclusion, the epidemiology of schizophrenia is characterized by prominent variability and gradients that can help guide future research.
Background: Understanding variations in the incidence of schizophrenia is a crucial step in unravelling the aetiology of this group of disorders. The aims of this review are to systematically identify studies related to the incidence of schizophrenia, to describe the key features of these studies, and to explore the distribution of rates derived from these studies.
With respect to mortality, a substantial gap exists between the health of people with schizophrenia and the general community. This differential mortality gap has worsened in recent decades. In light of the potential for second-generation antipsychotic medications to further adversely influence mortality rates in the decades to come, optimizing the general health of people with schizophrenia warrants urgent attention.
Based on the epidemiological finding that individuals with schizophrenia tend to be born in winter/spring when compared to the general population, we examined (1) the strength and timing of this effect in Northern Hemisphere sites, and (2) the correlation between the season of birth effect size and latitude. Studies were located via electronic data sources, published citations, and letters to authors. Inclusion criteria were that studies specify the diagnostic criteria used, that studies specify the counts of schizophrenia and general population births for each month, and that subjects and the general population be drawn from the same birth years and catchment area. We extracted data from eight studies based on 126,196 patients with schizophrenia and 86,605,807 general population births and drawn from 27 Northern Hemisphere sites. Comparing winter/spring versus summer/autumn births, we found a significant excess for winter/spring births (pooled odds ratio = 1.07; 95% confidence interval 1.05, 1.08; population attributable risk = 3.3%). There was a small but significant positive correlation between the odds ratios for the season of birth comparison and latitude (r = 0.271,p < 0.005). Furthermore, the shape of the seasonality in schizophrenia births varied by latitude band. These variations may encourage researchers to generate candidate seasonally fluctuating exposures.
Many of the correlates of endorsement of psychosis-screen items are also associated with psychosis. Unravelling the factors that contribute to this broader non-clinical phenotype will aid our understanding of psychosis.
Diagnosis in psychiatry increasingly struggles to fulfil its key purposes, namely, to guide treatment and to predict outcome. The clinical staging model, widely used in clinical medicine yet virtually ignored in psychiatry, is proposed as a more refined form of diagnosis which could restore the utility of diagnosis, promote early intervention and also make more sense of the confusing array of biological research findings in psychiatry by organizing data into a coherent clinicopathological framework. A selective review of key papers in clinical medicine and psychiatry which describe clinical and clinicopathological staging, and a range of related issues. Clinical staging has immediate potential to improve the logic and timing of interventions in psychiatry just as it does in many complex and potentially serious medical disorders. Interventions could be evaluated in terms of their ability to prevent or delay progression from earlier to later stages of disorder, and they could be selected on clear-cut risk/benefit criteria. Biological variables and a range of candidate risk factors could be studied within and across stages, and their role, specificity and centrality in risk, onset and progression of disorder could be greatly clarified. A clinicopathological framework could be progressively constructed. Clinical staging with a restructure across and within diagnostic boundaries with the explicit operationalization of criteria for extent and progression of disorder should be actively explored in psychiatry as a heuristic strategy for the development and evaluation of earlier, safer, and more effective clinical interventions, and for clarifying the biological basis of psychiatric disorders.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.