Epidemiology of mental disorders in Camberwell

Abstract

SYNOPSISA two-stage psychiatric survey of a random sample of adults aged 18–64 from Camberwell is described. Agency interviewers carried out the first stage (N = 800), using the shorter form of the Present State Examination (PSE). MRC interviewers, using the full PSE, saw a stratified sample of these (N = 310) in the second stage. A second interview was sought with all those of Index of Definition (ID) level 5 and above at the first interview (‘cases’) and with a random sample of those below that level. 20·9% refused or were never available for the first interview. Of the 800 subjects successfully interviewed, 10% refused a further interview and 12·4% of those finally selected for this interview were either unavailable or changed their minds. The MRC data, weighted to represent the whole sample, are used in our analyses. The prevalence of psychiatric disorder as defined in our study was calculated at 6·1% for men and 14·9% for women. Women shared a higher prevalence of disorder in the age-groups 25–34 and 45–54, but in men there was no significant association with age.In contrast to the findings of Brown & Harris (1978), social class did not have a strong association with disorder. Single men had much higher rates than married men, while the reverse was true in women. In both sexes employment was associated with lower rates of disorder. An attempt to explain the high prevalence in women in terms of their role in marriage and child-care was only partly successful.

Maternal neurotic symptoms and infants' risk of developing persistent diarrhoea

“…The fact that in studies characterizing sex differences, higher cutting points had better discriminating capacity among women (Tarnopolsky et al 23 , 1979) was also taken into account. In this respect, there is controversy as to whether there are differences between women and men (Bash & BashLiechti 6 , 1974; Bebbington et al 7 , 1981); these differences may be better explained by social factors (Dekker & Webb 9 , 1974). In most societies, due to the roles that women play, they tend to experience more life events, chronic social stresses and receive less social support than men; this greater exposure to risk factors may explain their increased vulnerability to neurotic disorders (Dekker & Webb 9 , 1974; Dohrenwend & Dohrenwend 10 , 1974).…”

Socioeconomic Status and Depressive Syndrome: The Role of Inter- and Intra-Generational Mobility, Government Assistance, and Work Environment

“…The case-control studies of Brown and his colleagues (Brown and Harris 1978) showed that lower class women in London were at higher risk for clinical depression than those of the middle class, but this difference was concentrated among women in the two class strata who had young children in the home. Curiously, a later study in the same area of London failed to replicate the social class aspect of Brown et alia's work (Bebbington et al 1981). In the Epidemiologic Catchment Area Program, prevalence data showed weak and non-significant relationships of occupation, income, and education, to major depressive disorder in the year prior to the interview (Weissman et al 1991).…”

The importance of low control at work and home on depression and anxiety: do these effects vary by gender and social class?

“…Higher rates of emotional distress, pain, tiredness, and mental illness have been found in those with lower rather than higher social positions (Hunt et al, 1985), but for so-called minor psychiatric disorders (largely depression and anxiety) the evidence for a social gradient is less clear. Some studies have found higher rates among those with lower socio-economic status (Kessler, 1994;Bebbington et al, 1981;Hodiamont et al, 1987) while others (Hare and Shaw, 1965;Lin et al, 1989) have found no social class gradient.…”