| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Psychiatric Bulletin | Advances in Psychiatric Treatment | All RCPsych Journals |
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Department of Psychiatry, University of Ibadan
Department of Medical Social Services
Department of Psychiatry, University College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria
Correspondence: Professor Oye Gureje, Department of Psychiatry, University College Hospital, PMB 5116, Ibadan, Nigeria. Tel: +234 2 2410 146; e-mail: ogureje{at}comui.edu.ng
Declaration of interest None. Funding detailed in Acknowledgements.
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMETHODRESULTSDISCUSSIONClinical Implications and...ACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Aims To conduct such a study.
Method Multistage stratified clustered sampling of households in the Yoruba-speaking parts of Nigeria. Face-to-face interviews used the World Mental Health version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WMH–CIDI).
Results Of the 4984 people interviewed (response rate 79.9%), 12.1% had a lifetime rate of at least one DSM–IV disorder and 5.8% had 12-month disorders. Anxiety disorders were the most common (5.7% lifetime, 4.1% 12-month rates) but virtually no generalised anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder were identified. Of the 23% who had seriously disabling disorders, only about 8% had received treatment in the preceding 12 months. Treatment was mostly provided by general medical practitioners; only a few were treated by alternative practitioners such as traditional healers.
Conclusions The observed low rates seem to reflect demographic and ascertainment factors. There was a large burden of unmet need for care among people with serious disorders.
|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODRESULTSDISCUSSIONClinical Implications and...ACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
There is a wide variation in the rates reported for both lifetime and 12-month disorders across studies. For example, a 12-month rate of 30% was reported for the USA, 23% for Australia and 9.6% for western Europe, even when broadly identical ascertainment tools had been used (Kessler et al, 1994; Andrews et al, 2001; Alonso et al, 2004). Although surveys examining prevalence of disorders are important, information on met and unmet need for treatment is also required, given that having a diagnosable mental disorder is not synonymous with need (Spitzer, 1998; Regier et al, 2000) and that the rates of met need also vary widely (Bijl et al, 2003). Here we present the results of the first large-scale community study of mental disorders in sub-Saharan Africa in which face-to-face interviews were conducted to generate estimates of lifetime and 12-month DSM–IV disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 1994). We present data on prevalence, socio-demographic correlates and service use.
|
|
METHOD |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODRESULTSDISCUSSIONClinical Implications and...ACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
In the first stage of the sampling, using an ordered list of all primary sampling units stratified on the basis of states and size, 40 primary sampling units were systematically selected with probability proportional to size. Each unit was a local government area, a geographic unit with a defined administrative and political structure. In the second stage, four enumeration areas were systematically selected from each primary sampling unit. Enumeration areas are geographic subunits of local government areas and consist of between 50–70 housing units. They are a creation of the National Population Commission and are used by the Commission in the conduct of national censuses.
All the selected enumeration areas were visited by research interviewers prior to the interview phase of the survey and enumeration and listing of all the household units contained therein was conducted. These lists were entered into a centralised computer data-file, thus creating a sample in which the probability of any individual household being selected to participate in the survey was equal for every household within an enumeration area. In the final stage of the selection, which was conducted during the interview phase of the survey, interviewers obtained a full listing of all residents in the household from an informant. After identifying household residents who were aged 18 years or over and were fluent in the language of the study (Yoruba), a probability procedure was used to select one respondent to be interviewed. The Kish table selection method was used to select one eligible person as the respondent. Only one such person was selected per household, except for a random 25% of households in which a secondary respondent, a spouse of the primary respondent who had been interviewed, was also selected for a study of assortative mating. When the primary respondent was either unavailable following repeated calls (up to five calls were made) or refused to participate, no replacement was made within the household. On the basis of this selection procedure, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 4984 respondents between February and November 2002. The response rate was 79.9%. Respondents were informed about the study and provided consent, mostly verbal but sometimes signed, before interviews were conducted. The survey was approved by the University of Ibadan and University College Hospital, Ibadan joint ethics review board.
Measures
Diagnostic assessment was made with the use of the World Health
Organization’s World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative version of
the Composite International Diagnostic interview (CIDI;
Kessler & Ustun, 2004).
The CIDI is a fully structured diagnostic interview that is layadministered
and can generate diagnoses according to both the ICD–10
(World Health Organization,
1992) and DSM–IV criteria. We have used earlier versions of
the CIDI extensively in Yoruba (Gureje et al,
1992,
1995). The Yoruba version of
the WMH–CIDI used in this survey was derived, as in earlier versions,
using standard protocols of iterative back translation conducted by panels of
bilingual experts. The WMH–CIDI primarily ascertains lifetime disorders.
For respondents with lifetime occurrence of a disorder, follow-up questions
allow a determination of whether they have also experienced such disorders in
the prior 12 months. Specifically, we considered the occurrence of anxiety
disorders (panic disorder, generalised anxiety disorder, agoraphobia without
panic disorder, specific phobia, social phobia, post-traumatic stress
disorder, obsessive–compulsive disorder), mood disorders (major
depressive disorder, dysthymia, bipolar disorder) and substance use disorders
(alcohol and drug abuse and dependence). The DSM–IV organic exclusion
rules were applied to all diagnoses and so were hierarchy rules, except in the
case of substance use disorders, where misuse is defined with or without
dependence.
Severity
Ratings of severity associated with each disorder experienced in the prior
12 months were made. This was done by asking respondents to focus on the month
in the past year when the symptoms of the disorder were most persistent and
severe and to rate the disability associated with the disorder during that
month using an expanded version of the Sheehan Disability Scales (SDS;
Sheehan et al, 1996).
Four areas of functioning (work performance, household maintenance, social
life and intimate relationship) are assessed by the SDS on a 0–10 visual
analogue scale which also incorporates the verbal descriptors
‘none’ (0), ‘mild’ (1–3), ‘moderate’
(4–6), ‘severe’ (7–9) and ‘very severe’
(10). The design of the SDS, incorporating as it does both visual and verbal
dimensions for rating, is particularly useful in a study such as ours,
comprising a large number of respondents with no formal education. Respondents
with any 12-month disorders were categorised as having severe or moderate
disorder if they had a moderate or higher rating on the SDS. All other cases
of 12-month disorders were rated as mild.
Training and quality control
The interviews were conducted by 24 trained interviewers, all of whom had
at least a high-school education. Many had been involved in field surveys and
were experienced at conducting face-to-face interviews. Interviewers received
a 2-week training consisting of an initial 6-day training by O.G., followed by
a further 2 days of debriefing and review after each interviewer had conducted
two pilot interviews in the field. Six supervisors, all of whom underwent the
same level of training, monitored the day-to-day implementation of the
survey.
Quality control was implemented at various levels. A supervisor was responsible for the work of four interviewers and checked every questionnaire returned by those interviewers for completeness and consistency. He or she made random field checks on at least 10% of each interviewer’s prospective respondents (more at the beginning of the survey) to ensure the correct implementation of the protocol and full adherence to the interview format. Special emphasis was placed on the detection of systematic errors or bias in the administration of the interview. Each supervisor made regular returns to the project coordinator who, along with the principal investigator, also conducted random checks on respondents in the field. During the fieldwork, regular debriefing sessions were held when all interviewers and supervisors returned to the central office for review of experience and discussion of difficulties. Following data collection, an extensive data-cleaning process was conducted to identify and rectify inconsistencies in dating, missing values, etc.
Data analysis
In order to take account of the stratified, multistage sampling procedure
and the associated clustering, weights were derived and applied to the rates
presented in this report. The first weighting adjusted for the probability of
selection within households and for non-response. Also, post-stratification
adjustments to the target gender and age range were made to adjust for
differences between the sample and the total Nigerian population (according to
2000 United Nations projections). The weight so derived, the ‘part 1
weight’, was normalised to reset the sum of weights back to the original
sample size of 4984. A second weight, the ‘part 2 weight’, was
also derived and applied to a probability subsample of the survey sample who
completed the long form of the interview (part 2; n=1682). The part 2
weight is a product of the part 1 weight as well as the empirical probability
of selection into the group with the long interview. This probability varied
according to the presence or absence of selected diagnostic symptoms. Thus,
all participants who endorsed a set of diagnostic symptoms in part 1 of the
interview were selected into part 2 with certainty (i.e. a probability of
1.0). All others were randomly selected into part 2 with a constant
probability of 25%. The weight was then normalised to reset the sum of weights
back to the sample size of 1682.
The analysis took account of the complex sample design and weighting. Thus, we used the Taylor series linearisation method implemented with the SUDAAN statistical package to estimate standard errors for proportions (SUDAAN version 8.0.1). Demographic correlates were explored with logistic regression analysis (Hosmer & Lemeshow, 2000) and the estimates of standard errors of the odds ratio obtained were made using SUDAAN. All of the confidence intervals reported are adjusted for design effects.
In this study we examined the association between disorders and receipt of treatment on the one hand with sociodemographic variables of age, gender, education and per capita income on the other. Per capita income was calculated by dividing household income by the number of people in the household. Respondents’ per capita income was categorised by relating each respondent’s income to the median per capita income of the entire sample. Thus, an income was rated low if its ratio to the median was 0.5 or less, low-average if the ratio was 0.5–1.0, high-average if it was 1.0–2.0 and high if it was over 2.0. Residence was classified as rural (fewer than 12 000 households), semi-urban (12 000–20 000 households) or urban (more than 20 000 households). Service providers were grouped into ‘general medical’ (essentially general practitioners but also non-mental-health specialists), ‘mental health’ (including psychologists, social workers, psychiatric nurses), ‘healthcare’ (general nurses, counsellors and other trained health workers) and ‘non-health’ (mostly alternative or traditional health workers).
|
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODRESULTSDISCUSSIONClinical Implications and...ACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
Prevalence of disorders
Table 2 shows that 12.1% of
the sample had had at least one lifetime DSM–IV disorder and that 5.6%
had experienced at least one of the disorders in the prior 12 months. Specific
phobia was the most common disorder, occurring in 5.4% ever in lifetime and in
3.5% in the prior 12 months (Table
2). The rates for the other anxiety disorders were substantially
lower. In this sample generalised anxiety disorder and post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD) as identified by the WMH–CIDI, were virtually absent.
Lifetime prevalence of major depressive disorder was 3.3% while that of
alcohol abuse was 2.8%. Differences in the lifetime rates of the disorder
groups were generally less remarkable than those in the 12-month rates. For
example, the ratio of the lifetime rates of mood disorders to anxiety
disorders was 1:1.4 whereas it was 1:3.2 for the 12-month rates. Most (94.4%)
of those with 12-month disorders had only one disorder. Two 12-month disorders
were identified in 0.3% of the sample, and three disorders in 0.1%.
|
Most of the disorders were mild (77.1%). However, this broad characterisation hides differences in the proportions of serious cases within disorders. For example, the few cases of obsessive–compulsive disorder identified were serious, whereas only a few of those with specific phobia had disabling conditions. Predictably, a much higher proportion of people with two disorders (53%) and three disorders (76%) were rated as having a serious disorder.
Treatment
Treatment for mental health problems in the previous 12 months was reported
by about 1.2% of the sample. Table
3 shows that less than 10% of those with disorders, irrespective
of whether the disorder was serious or mild, had received any form of
treatment for mental disorders any time in the 12-month period. Most were
receiving treatment from general practitioners and from non-mental-health
specialists. Only about 0.6% of those with serious disorders had received
treatment in a specialist setting; conversely, almost 2% had been in the care
of alternative or traditional practitioners. Among those with no DSM–IV
disorder (many of whom might nevertheless have had symptoms of psychological
distress), 0.7% were in treatment. Of these, a substantial proportion (0.4%)
were receiving treatment from alternative or traditional health
practitioners.
|
Correlates of lifetime and 12-month disorders
There were only a few socio-demographic predictors of disorders. Women were
less likely to have a lifetime disorder than men, but this was not the case
for 12-month disorders (Table
4). When groups of disorders were examined (not in the table),
women were significantly less likely to have either a lifetime or a 12-month
diagnosis of a substance use disorder, but were not different from men in
regard to the other disorder groups. In particular, neither the risk of
lifetime disorder (OR=1.2, 95% CI 0.9–1.7) or risk of 12-month disorder
(OR=0.9, 95% CI 0.3–2.6) was significantly higher for women than for
men. Income was related to the probability of having a disorder, especially a
lifetime disorder. Surprisingly, compared with participants in the highest
income level those in the lower income groups were less likely to have a
disorder. Participants living in semi-urban areas (but not those in rural
areas) were significantly less likely than those in urban areas to have
lifetime and 12-month disorders.
|
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODRESULTSDISCUSSIONClinical Implications and...ACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Prevalence
Having considered some general limitations, the findings suggest that about
1 in 17 respondents had a DSM disorder in the previous 12 months whereas about
1 in 8 had had a lifetime disorder. As in other settings
(Kessler et al, 1994;
Andrews et al, 2001),
anxiety disorders were the most frequent, occurring in 4.1% of the sample in
the previous 12 months and 5.7% in the lifetime. Substance use disorders were
surprisingly relatively common: the 12-month rate of 0.5% for alcohol abuse is
close to that of 0.7% for alcohol abuse reported for six European countries
(Alonso et al, 2004).
The overall rates of 12.1% for lifetime disorder and 5.8% for 12-month
disorder are lower than the respective rates of 25.0% and 9.6% reported for
the six European countries in which identical ascertainment procedures were
used (Alonso et al,
2004) and considerably lower than those reported in previous
studies using earlier versions of the CIDI
(Kessler et al, 1994;
Bijl et al, 1998;
Andrews et al,
2001).
Why are the rates low?
Although some of the variation in rates may in part be due to the use of
different versions of the ascertainment tool, there may be other more
fundamental differences at play. First, significant variations may exist in
the true rates of mental disorders across cultures, just as is true for
physical disorders. Significantly lower rates of disorder may reflect both a
differential age at onset and the age structure of the population. If a
substantial proportion of the sample is yet to live through the median age at
onset for a disorder, the rate of that disorder may be low. For example, the
mean age of our part 2 sample was 35 years (s.e.=0.37). However, using the
actuarial method to estimate age at onset
(Halli & Rao, 1992), we
found that the median age at onset for any mood disorder (i.e. the 50th
percentile on the age-at-onset distribution) in our sample was 45 years. This
is considerably higher than the age of 30 years reported by Kessler et
al (2005) in their US
sample. Second, the ascertainment tool may perform differently in different
cultural settings. Cultures may differ in the likelihood that respondents in
community surveys will endorse sufficient symptoms to reach diagnostic
thresholds. In this regard, the near-absence of DSM–IV generalised
anxiety disorder and PTSD is striking. We examined the possibility that people
with the former disorder might have been systematically missed in our sample
as a result of ascertainment procedure. The screening questions for
generalised anxiety disorder in the WMH–CIDI ask whether respondents
have ever had a period of persistent worry, nervousness or anxiety.
Individuals who endorse any of these screens are referred to the specific
section for generalised anxiety disorder, in which they are asked to indicate
their sources of worry; if they indicate only one specific source of worry,
rather than several or unknown, they are skipped out of the section and
assumed to be unlikely to have the disorder. In our survey, 22% of the part 1
sample endorsed one of the screening questions for generalised anxiety
disorder; however, when taken to the specific section, 88% of those screening
positive indicated only one source of worry and were skipped out of the
section. Most of these identified ‘the economy’ or ‘personal
finances’ as their sole source of worry. An indication that they were
nevertheless impaired (and might have been wrongly classified as non-cases)
was provided by comparing them with those who had not screened positive using
an item in the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule
(Rehm et al, 1999),
which forms part of the WMH–CIDI. Those who had endorsed a generalised
anxiety disorder screening question were significantly more likely to report
that in the month before interview ‘health-related problems caused
[them] difficulties either getting along with people, maintaining a normal
social life, or participating in social activities’ than those who had
not endorsed such a screening question, after controlling for age, the
presence of any current DSM–IV disorder and any self-reported medical
disorder (OR=3.5, 95% CI 1.2–10.2; P<0.03). In this regard,
the suggestion by Kessler
(2000) that the DSM criterion
ruling out generalised anxiety disorder if persistent worry could be regarded
as justified might make socio-economically disadvantaged persons with chronic
life situations unlikely to fulfil the criteria for this disorder seems
plausible. Perhaps other factors, including ethnicity, are involved as well,
given the lower rates of disorders often observed among Black people compared
with White people in population surveys
(Kessler et al,
1994).
Severity and service use
Most of the disorders recorded in our sample were mild. Indeed, just about
23% of the cases were of moderate or serious severity. This finding is
consonant with those of others, which suggests that although mental disorders
are common in the community, a large proportion of those with such disorders
nevertheless manage to function without considerable functional limitations
(Bijl et al, 1998;
Narrow et al, 2002;
WHO World Mental Health Survey Consortium,
2004). These findings support the contention that prevalence
studies in the community require complementary assessment of severity in order
to set the need for care in context
(Regier et al,
2000).
Our findings with regard to service utilisation are striking for the extent of unmet need they show. If we regard the index for need of a service as the presence of not just a disorder but of its associated disablement, people with serious disorders would be classified as being particularly in need of service. However, even in this group, only about 1 in 11 had received any form of service. It could be said that for many in this group specialist service might be the best option for care, but less than 1% of them reported being in specialist treatment in the previous 12 months. This finding is hardly surprising, given that Nigeria has fewer than 100 psychiatrists for its population of about 114 million persons. Also, a publication by the World Health Organization (2001) shows that mental health services are hampered by grossly inadequate personnel and facilities.
As well as participants with mild disorders, some with no DSM–IV disorder were also in receipt of treatment. It is possible that many of the latter were experiencing symptoms but did not reach the diagnostic threshold for a DSM–IV disorder. Does this constitute a waste of resources, given the shortfall in service to the more severe cases? Perhaps not. In a previous study we have shown that people with subclinical symptoms may nevertheless be at elevated risk of poor health outcomes 1 year later (Gureje, 2000); that is, subclinical syndromes are often predictive of disability at 12-month follow-up. Indeed, the observation that people who did not receive a DSM–IV diagnosis might have been missed because of methodological factors rather than an absence of impairment suggests that categorical diagnoses ascertained in epidemiological surveys have their limitations. In the context of our setting, therefore, diversion of resources from mild or subclinical cases to the more severe cases is not the solution. Providing more service to everyone in need is likely to be a better approach (Stein & Gureje, 2004). That need may have to be determined by the presence of symptoms and associated impairment rather than by a categorical diagnosis. It is also clear that in a setting with few specialist, medical or nursing staff, service can only be realistically provided to the many in need by primary healthcare workers with basic but relevant training in the identification and treatment of common mental disorders.
Surprisingly, only a small proportion of respondents had received any treatment from traditional healers. This observation is likely to reflect the fact that the questions about service use were specifically related to the syndromes assessed in the interviews. It is not unlikely that even when traditional healers had been contacted, the presenting symptoms had been physical rather than those elicited in the interview.
Socio-demographic predictors of prevalence
Other than the clear association of male gender with substance use
disorders and the observation that women were less likely than men to have a
lifetime disorder, there was no striking gender difference in prevalence or
disorder type. In particular, the common observation of an association of
female gender with mood disorders, particularly with depression
(Kessler, 2003), was not
found. In our earlier study in primary care, we also failed to find an
association between female gender and depression in this cultural setting
(Gureje et al, 1995).
However, given the small numbers of cases in these observations, there is a
need for caution in drawing any conclusions. Still, this observation requires
further exploration as it may throw light on cultural differences between men
and women in the experience of putative depression-provoking environmental
experiences (Kessler, 2003).
The finding that people with lower income were less likely to have a disorder
is unusual and may, at least in part, be related to a reduced willingness to
report psychological symptoms. Our findings suggest a need for more studies
examining the relationship between poverty and common mental disorders in
low-income countries (Patel &
Kleinman, 2003).
Future research
There is a need for a more detailed examination of the factors that
influence wide variations in the rates of mental disorders across cultures.
Factors due to the demographic and social attributes of study populations are
particularly germane. Perhaps there is also an ethnic difference, since the
rates of both lifetime and 12-month disorders are significantly lower among
Black than White populations (Kessler et al,
1994,
2005). However, our study has
shown that even though mental disorders commonly reported in other cultural
settings may present in our culture, the rates of disorders ascertained by
structured interviews may be influenced by various methodological factors. A
much smaller but historically important study conducted by Leighton et
al (1963) found no
significant difference in the pattern of psychopathology between Yoruba
speakers in Nigeria and residents of Stirling County in the USA. In contrast
to our findings, that study found broadly similar rates in Nigeria and in the
USA. However, the participants had received detailed, semi-structured
assessments conducted by experienced clinicians rather than lay-administered
questionnaires. In essence, the question about cultural variation in patterns
is still an open one, even though we now know that documenting cultural
similarities and differences is important to attempts to determine the global
burden of mental disorders
(Üstün et al,
2004). New enquiries are also suggested by the observations that
gender and income did not bear expected relationships with mental disorders in
our sample. What social or cultural factors are at play here?
This first large-scale study of mental disorders in sub-Saharan Africa in which a replicable procedure was used presents unique opportunities for exploring cross-national variations in the occurrence of mental disorders. The use of ascertainment tools with wide international application offers the possibility of cross-national comparisons. One such opportunity has recently been seized in our cross-national data on prevalence of broad diagnostic groupings in 16 countries (WHO World Mental Health Survey Consortium, 2004). It is, however, clear that caution should be exercised in interpreting the results of such comparisons. Rather, further exploration of the data from these different countries may help throw some light on the reasons why rates of disorders vary widely across countries. Such an exercise may also help in the refinement of the criteria for mental disorders as we prepare to revise current versions of psychiatric classificatory systems. Clinical re-interviews of respondents to structured interviews as well as focused qualitative studies of the personal meanings of symptoms of mental distress are also required. We intend to conduct further analyses specifically addressing these methodological issues.
|
|
Clinical Implications and Limitations |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODRESULTSDISCUSSIONClinical Implications and...ACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
LIMITATIONS
|
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODRESULTSDISCUSSIONClinical Implications and...ACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODRESULTSDISCUSSIONClinical Implications and...ACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Alonso, J., Angermeyer, M. C., Bernert, S., et al (2004) Prevalence of mental disorders in Europe: results from the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMD) project. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica Supplementum, 420, 21 –27.[Medline]
American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edn (DSM–IV). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
Andrews, G., Henderson, S. & Hall, W.
(2001) Prevalence, comorbidity, disability and service
utilisation. Overview of the Australian National Mental Health Survey.
British Journal of Psychiatry,
178, 145
–153.
Ayonrinde, O., Gureje, O. & Lawal, R.
(2004) Psychiatric research in Nigeria: bridging tradition
and modernisation. British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 536
–538.
Bijl, R. V., Ravelli, A. & van Zessen, G. (1998) Prevalence of psychiatric disorder in the general population: results of the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS). Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 33, 587 –595.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bijl, R. V., de Graaf, R., Hiripi, E., et al
(2003) The prevalence of treated and untreated mental
disorders in five countries. Health Affairs
(Millwood), 22, 122
–133.
Gureje, O. (2000) Psychological disorders and symptoms in primary care: association with disability and service use after 12 months. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 37, 220 –224.
Gureje, O. & Alem, A. (2000) Mental health policy developments in Africa. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 78, 475 –482.[Medline]
Gureje, O., Obikoya, B. & Ikuesan, B. A. (1992) Prevalence of specific disorders in an urban primary care setting. East African Medical Journal, 69, 282 –287.[Medline]
Gureje, O., Odejide, A. O., Olatawura, M. C., et al (1995) Results from the Ibadan Centre. In Mental Illness in General Health Care: An International Study (eds T. B. Üstün & N. Sartorius), pp. 156 –173. Chichester: John Wiley.
Gureje, O., Lasebikan, V. O., Ephraim-Oluwanuga, O., et
al (2005) Community study of knowledge of and attitude
to mental illness in Nigeria. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 186, 436
–441.
Halli, S. S. & Rao, K. V. (1992) Advanced Techniques of Population Analysis. New York: Plenum.
Hosmer, D. W. & Lemeshow, S. (2000) Applied Logistic Regression (2nd edn). New York: John Wiley.
Kessler, R. C. (2000) The epidemiology of pure and comorbid generalized anxiety disorder: a review and evaluation of recent research. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica Supplementum, 406, 7 –13.[Medline]
Kessler, R. C. (2003) Epidemiology of women and depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 74, 5 –13.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kessler, R. C. & Ustun, T. B. (2004) The World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative Version of the World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 13, 93 –121.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kessler, R. C., McGonagle, K. A., Zhao, S., et al (1994) Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of DSM–III–R psychiatric disorders in the United States: results from the National Comorbidity Survey. Archives of General Psychiatry, 51, 8 –19.[Abstract]
Kessler, R. C., Berglund, P., Demler, O., et al
(2005) Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of
DSM–IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication.
Archives of General Psychiatry,
62, 593
–602.
Leighton, A. H., Lambo, T. A., Hughes, C. C., et al (1963) Psychiatric Disorder among the Yoruba. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Narrow, W. E., Rae, D. S., Robins, L. N., et al
(2002) Revised prevalence estimates of mental disorders in
the United States: using a clinical significance criterion to reconcile 2
surveys’ estimates. Archives of General
Psychiatry, 59, 115
–123.
Patel, V. & Kleinman, A. (2003) Poverty and common mental disorders in developing countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 81, 609 –615.[Medline]
Regier, D. A., Narrow, W. E., Rupp, A., et al (2000) The epidemiology of mental disorder treatment need: community estimates of medical necessity. In Unmet Need in Psychiatry (eds G. Andrews & S. Henderson), pp. 41 –58. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rehm, J., Ustun, T. B., Saxena, S., et al (1999) On the development and psychometric testing of the WHO screening instrument to assess disablement in the general population. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 8, 110 –123.
Sheehan, D. V., Harnnet-Sheehan, K. & Raj, B. A. (1996) The measurement of disability. International Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11 (suppl. 3), 89 –95.[Medline]
Spitzer, R. L. (1998) Diagnosis and the need
for treatment are not the same. Archives of General
Psychiatry, 55, 120
.
Stein, D. J. & Gureje, O. (2004) Depression and anxiety in the developing world: is it time to medicalise the suffering? Lancet, 364, 233 –234.[CrossRef][Medline]
Üstün, T. B., Ayuso-Mateos, J. L., Chatterji, S.,
et al (2004) Global burden of depressive disorders
in the year 2000. British Journal of Psychiatry,
184, 386
–392.
WHO World Mental Health Survey Consortium
(2004) Prevalence, severity, and unmet need for treatment of
mental disorders in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys.
JAMA, 291, 2581
–2590.
World Health Organization (1992) International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD–10). Geneva: WHO.
World Health Organization (2001) ATLAS, Mental Health Resources in the World 2001. Geneva: Geneva: WHO.
Received for publication November 16, 2004. Revision received September 13, 2005. Accepted for publication September 17, 2005.
Related articles in BJP:
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. Kagee Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety among a Sample of South African Patients Living with a Chronic Illness J Health Psychol, May 1, 2008; 13(4): 547 - 555. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. J. Stein, S. Seedat, A. Herman, H. Moomal, S. G. Heeringa, R. C. Kessler, and D. R. Williams Lifetime prevalence of psychiatric disorders in South Africa The British Journal of Psychiatry, February 1, 2008; 192(2): 112 - 117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. E. MEDINA-MORA, G. BORGES, C. BENJET, C. LARA, and P. BERGLUND Psychiatric disorders in Mexico: lifetime prevalence in a nationally representative sample The British Journal of Psychiatry, June 1, 2007; 190(6): 521 - 528. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Tyrer From the Editor's desk The British Journal of Psychiatry, May 1, 2007; 190(5): 456 - 456. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 V. Patel Mental health in low- and middle-income countries Br. Med. Bull., April 30, 2007; (2007) ldm010v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Psychiatric Bulletin | Advances in Psychiatric Treatment | All RCPsych Journals |
